In September 2016, the 13th AWID international Forum brought together in Brazil over 1800 feminists and women’s rights advocates in a spirit of resistance and resilience.
This section highlights the gains, learnings and resources that came out of our rich conversations. We invite you to explore, share and comment!
One of the key takeaways from the 2016 Forum was the need to broaden and deepen our cross-movement work to address rising fascisms, fundamentalisms, corporate greed and climate change.
With this in mind, we have been working with multiple allies to grow these seeds of resistance:
And through our next strategic plan and Forum process, we are committed to keep developing ideas and deepen the learnings ignited at the 2016 Forum.
AWID Forums started in 1983, in Washington DC. Since then, the event has grown to become many things to many peoples: an iterative process of sharpening our analyses, vision and actions; a watershed moment that reinvigorates participants’ feminisms and energizes their organizing; and a political home for women human rights defenders to find sanctuary and solidarity.
Razan era una médica voluntaria de 21 años en Palestina.
Le dispararon cuando corría hacia un muro fronterizo fortificado, en un intento por llegar hasta una persona herida en el este de la ciudad de Khan Younis, en el sur de Gaza.
En su última publicación en Facebook, Razan dijo: «Estoy volviendo y no retirándome», y añadió: «Denme con sus balas, no tengo miedo».
Para fortalecer a nossa voz e poder coletivos para obter mais recursos de melhor qualidade para a organização feminista, de direitos das mulheres, de LBTQI+ e de aliados globalmente.
L'EXCLUSION, LA STIGMATISATION ET LES ABUS INSTITUTIONNELS
auxquels les personnes trans et les travestis continuent de faire face au quotidien
En tant que féministes luttant pour la justice de genre, la paix, la justice économique, sociale et environnementale, nous savons qu'il n'existe pas de recette miracle, mais plutôt un éventail de possibilités qui peuvent faire changer les choses, et qui les font changer.
Cet éventail d’options est aussi diversifié que nos mouvements et les communautés dans lesquelles nous vivons et nous luttons.
Avant de vous présenter quelques-unes de ces propositions féministes pour un autre monde, voici les principes qui encadrent nos propositions :
Nous croyons qu'il ne doit pas y avoir un seul modèle pour tous, et que chacun-e doit avoir le droit de revendiquer et de contribuer à la construction d'un autre monde possible, comme le formule le slogan du Forum social mondial.
Cela inclut le droit de participer à la gouvernance démocratique et d'influer sur son avenir, politiquement, économiquement, socialement et culturellement.
L'autodétermination économique permet aux peuples de prendre le contrôle de leurs ressources naturelles et d'utiliser ces ressources pour atteindre leurs propres objectifs ou pour un usage collectif. En outre, le pouvoir d’agir des femmes dans la sphère économique est fondamental pour atténuer le caractère souvent cyclique de la pauvreté, le déni de l'éducation, de la sécurité et de la sûreté.
Le principe de l'égalité réelle est énoncé dans la Convention sur l'élimination de toutes les formes de discrimination à l'égard des femmes (CEDAW) et d'autres instruments internationaux relatifs aux droits humains. Ce principe est fondamental pour le développement et la transformation vers une économie juste, car il affirme que tous les êtres humains naissent libres et égaux.
La non-discrimination fait partie intégrante du principe d'égalité, qui veille à ce que personne ne soit privé de ses droits en raison de facteurs tels que la race, le sexe, la langue, la religion, l'orientation sexuelle, l'identité sexuelle, une opinion politique ou autre, l’origine nationale ou sociale, la fortune ou la naissance.
La dignité inhérente à toute personne sans distinction doit être maintenue et respectée. Alors que les États doivent veiller à l'utilisation d’un maximum de ressources disponibles pour la réalisation des droits humains, le fait d’exiger ces droits et la dignité est un enjeu clé pour la lutte de la société civile et la mobilisation populaire.
Ce principe, mis en œuvre par les efforts coordonnés visant à transformer les institutions injustes, soutient le rétablissement de l’équilibre entre la « participation » (entrées) et la « distribution » (sorties), lorsque celui-ci est rompu.
Il permet de poser des limites à l'accumulation monopolistique de capital et d'autres abus liés à la propriété. Ce concept est fondé sur un modèle économique qui repose sur l'équité et la justice.
Pour changer les choses, nous avons besoin de réseaux féministes solides et diversifiés. Nous avons besoin de mouvements qui renforcent la solidarité du niveau personnel au niveau politique, du niveau local au niveau global, et inversement.
Construire le pouvoir collectif grâce aux mouvements permet de convertir la lutte pour les droits humains, l'égalité et la justice en une force politique pour le changement qui ne peut être ignorée.
« Seuls les mouvements sont en mesure de créer des changements durables à des niveaux que la politique et les lois seules ne permettraient pas d’atteindre. »
Pour en savoir plus sur ce sujet, consulter S. Batliwala, 2012 Changer leur monde. Mouvements féministes, concepts et pratiques.
Née en 1936 dans le Maryland aux États-Unis, Sue était artiste, activiste et enseignante.
Son art était destiné aux femmes et parlait des femmes. En tant que féministe lesbienne, pendant un temps séparatiste, elle s'est engagée à créer des espaces réservés aux femmes. En 1976, elle a acheté un terrain qui est toujours géré par des femmes qui y séjournent pour créer de l'art. Sue a pris une position farouche sur la question de la protection des femmes et des filles.
Avec son approche révolutionnaire, futuriste et anthropologique, elle remplissait chaque pièce dans laquelle elle entrait avec une intelligence et une excentricité authentiques, ainsi qu’un humour et un esprit impitoyable. Ses idées sur la conscience et la créativité continuent à inspirer beaucoup de gens.
Na última década, os financiadores investiram significativamente mais dinheiro na igualdade de género; no entanto, apenas 1% do financiamento filantrópico e de desenvolvimento foi efetivamente direcionado para apoiar diretamente mudanças sociais lideradas por feministas
Na busca da abundância, e para acabar com esta escassez crónica, o inquérito WITM é um convite para os defensores do feminismo e da justiça de género se envolverem no percurso da recolha coletiva de testemunhos e de casos para mobilizar mais recursos financeiros de melhor qualidade e recuperar o poder no ecossistema de financiamento neste momento. Em solidariedade com os movimentos que continuam invisibilizados, marginalizados e sem acesso a financiamento central, de longo prazo, flexível e baseado em fundos fiduciários, o inquérito WITM destaca o estado efetivo dos recursos, desafia soluções falsas e aponta.
The fight for a world full of workplaces that are free from of all forms of discrimination, stigma and exclusion is a worthy one. A world in which sex work is decriminalized and recognized as work is part of this.
A world where all workers have safe working conditions, dignified wages, and can enjoy the same rights like health care, pension pay, sick days, holidays, job security and more, no matter their gender, race, ethnicity, age or ability. Labor rights are feminist issues, and feminist unions play a key role in advancing the legal, labor and economic rights of all workers, especially migrant workers, domestic workers, informal workers and sex workers. These are folks who have most recently been disproportionately affected by the pandemic, its burdens of care, lockdowns, curfews and increased policing. Let us introduce you to the stories of feminists and union organizers that are fighting for better working conditions and better worlds for all.
The current global economic crisis provides stark evidence that the economic policies of the last 3 decades have not been working.
The devastation that the crisis has wrought on the most vulnerable households in the Global North and Global South is a reminder that the formulation of economic policy and the realization of human rights (economic, social, political, civil and cultural) have for too long been divorced from one another. Economic policy and human rights do not have to be opposing forces, but can exist symbiotically.
Macroeconomic policies affect the operation of the economy as a whole, shaping the availability and distribution of resources. Within this context, fiscal and monetary policies are key.
These policies affect key prices such as interest and exchange rates that directly influence, among other things, the level of employment, access to affordable credit, and the housing market.
Applying a human rights framework to macroeconomic policy allows States to better comply with their obligation to respect, protect, and fulfill economic and social rights. Human rights are internationally agreed-upon universal standards. These legal norms are articulated in United Nations treaties including, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
Article 1 of the UDHR states that, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”
Although the UDHR was written about six decades ago its relevance is enduring. Many of the ideas address concerns and critical issues that people continue to face globally. Issues regarding inhuman punishment (Art. 5), discrimination (Art. 7), property ownership (Art. 17), equal pay for equal work (Art. 23/2), and access to education (Art. 26/1) are pertinent matters in countries South and North of the equator.
More specifically, States have an obligation under international law to respect, protect and fulfill human rights, including the economic and social rights of people within their jurisdiction. This is particularly relevant now given the financial crisis. In the U.S., regulation is skewed in favor of certain interests. The failure to extend government’s supervisory role in the context of social and economic change is a failure with regard to the obligation to protect human rights.
States should abide by key human rights principles to achieve economic and social rights. Some of the principles have potentially important implications for governance of financial institutions and markets, yet these possibilities have been underexplored.
Economic and social rights have a concrete institutional and legal grounding. Global declarations, international treaties, covenants, and, in a number of cases, national constitutions have incorporated aspects of the economic and social rights framework—providing an institutional infrastructure in national and international law.
Some have suggested that a consideration of global justice may not be a useful pursuit because of the institutional complexities involved. However, this does not get around that fact that global institutions already have an impact on social justice, both positive and negative.
It is useful to tease out the implications that elements of alternative frameworks have for economic governance, specifically those supported by existing institutions. Economic and social rights represent one such concrete framework. The framework is an evolving one, and ongoing discussion and deliberation is necessary to address underdeveloped areas and potential deficiencies.
This section is based on CWGL’s blog “Applying a Human Rights Framework to Macroeconomic Policies” (2012).
Lara was a well-known and loved radio DJ on Motsweding FM in South Africa.
Lara was one of the first openly-transgender radio hosts on a mainstream station. She worked hard to shine a light on LGBTI issues.
Lara’s activism started at a young age when she would vocally defend her right to dress and behave as she felt comfortable to members of her community who didn’t yet understand what it meant to be transgender.
Ключевая цель исследования – осветить финансовое положение различных феминистских движений, инициатив за права женщин, гендерную справедливость, ЛГБТКИ+ и смежных движений по всему миру и, основываясь на этом, еще больше усилить аргументы в пользу увеличения объема денежных средств и передачи власти феминистским движениям.
El salario mínimo de Georgia se encuentra en un porcentaje inferior al de todos los países del mundo. Esta realidad afecta mayoritariamente a las mujeres.
El país no solo tiene una brecha salarial de género significativa, sino que las mujeres también trabajan más horas y más horas no reguladas antes de irse a casa para ocuparse de las tareas domésticas y de sus familias. No hay licencia por maternidad, no hay aumentos de salario por horas extras, no hay seguro de desempleo, y no hay licencias por enfermedad u otra protección social. Presionados por organizaciones occidentales, los partidos políticos oligárquicos georgianos han estado implementando reformas que están destruyendo el estado de bienestar, aumentando las medidas de austeridad y empeorando la explotación de lxs trabajadorxs, todo para los beneficios de grandes corporaciones que aplauden al país por su "facilidad para hacer negocios". Los medios de comunicación, cooptados por intereses privados y corporativos, están sesgados sobre estos temas o los silencian. La organización sindical sigue siendo una de las pocas opciones para luchar por los derechos humanos básicos y para hacer que el Estado y las empresas rindan cuentas ante las violaciones y persecuciones diarias y generalizadas contra lxs trabajadorxs, especialmente contra las mujeres.
Fuentes: Minimum-Wage y entrevista con Sopo Japaridze en Democracia Abierta
Anti-rights actors have had a substantive impact on our human rights framework and the progressive interpretation of human rights standards, especially rights related to gender and sexuality.
When it comes to the impact of conservative actors in international policy spaces, the overall picture today is of stasis and regressions.
We have witnessed the watering down of existing agreements and commitment; deadlock in negotiations; sustained undermining of UN agencies, treaty review bodies and Special Procedures; and success in pushing through regressive language in international human rights documents.
The CSW, held annually in March, has long been one of the most contested sites in the UN system. In March 2015, conservative efforts set the tone before events or negotiations even began; the outcome document of the Commission was a weak Declaration negotiated before any women’s rights activists even arrived on the ground.
At 2016’s CSW, the new Youth Caucus was infiltrated by large numbers of vocal anti-abortion and anti-SRHR actors, who shouted down progressive youth organizations. Again, intensive negotiations resulted in a lacklustre text, which included regressive language on ‘the family.’
Precisely when addressing women’s human rights is of urgent importance, the CSW has been rendered a depoliticized and weakened space. Using it to advance rights has become harder and harder since progressives’ energy is taken up trying to hold the ground against conservative backlash.
As the intergovernmental body responsible for the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe, the HRC is a key entry point for conservative actors. In recent years, this mechanism has been the scene for a number of damaging anti-human rights moves.
In conversation with other anti-rights actors, one strategy of conservative states, and blocs of states, is to aggressively negotiate out positive language and to introduce hostile amendments to resolutions, most often resolutions focusing on rights related to gender and sexuality.
To take one example, during the June 2016 session of the HRC, opposition was mounted towards a resolution on discrimination against women by the member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and allies. During contentious negotiations, multiple provisions were removed, including women’s and girls’ right to have control over their sexuality, sexual and reproductive health, and reproductive rights; and the need to repeal laws which perpetuate the patriarchal oppression of women and girls in families, and those criminalizing adultery or pardoning marital rape.
The HRC has also been the site of pernicious conservative initiatives to co-opt human rights norms and enact conservative “human rights” language, such as that of the Russia-led “traditional values” resolutions, and more recently the “Protection of the Family” agenda.
In 2015, moving their sights to another front, a number of religious right organizations began to target the Human Rights Committee, the treaty monitoring body for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a pivotal human rights instrument.
Anti-human rights groups mobilized in hopes of cementing their anti-abortion rhetoric into the treaty.
When the Committee announced it was drafting a new authoritative interpretation of the right to life, over 30 conservative non-state actors sent in written submissions, advocating their misleading discourse on ‘right to life’ - that life begins at conception and that abortion is a violation of the right - be incorporated in the Committee’s interpretation of article 6.
Conservative groups targeting the Human Rights Committee was a shift considering that historically anti-human rights actors have repeatedly attempted to undermine and invalidate the essential work of the treaty monitoring bodies, including the Human Rights Committee.
Anti-human rights actors were involved in lobbying towards the development of the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, focusing again on rights relating to gender and sexuality. These efforts had limited traction in their attempts to embed regressive language in Agenda 2030.
However, after successfully pushing back against progressive language in the final text, conservative actors then pivoted to another strategy. In an attempt to evade state accountability and undermine the universality of rights, several states have repeatedly made reservations to the Goals.
On behalf of the African Group, Senegal claimed that African states would only “implement the goals in line with the cultural and religious values of its countries.”
The Holy See also made a number of reservations, stating it was “confident that the related pledge ‘no one will be left behind’ would be read” as meaning “the right to life of the person, from conception until natural death.”
Saudi Arabia went one step further, declaring that the country would not follow any international rules relating to the SDGs that reference sexual orientation or gender identity, describing them as running “counter to Islamic law.”
Anti-rights actors have made increasing headway at the UN General Assembly (GA). Most recently, during the 71st session in 2016, the GA was the scene of feverish anti-rights organizing in opposition to the new mandate created by the Human Rights Council resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity in June 2016: the Independent Expert on SOGI. Four separate attempts were made to undercut the mandate in GA spaces.
One approach was to introduce a hostile resolution at the Third Committee[1], led by the African Group, which in essence aimed to indefinitely defer the new mandate. While this approach was not successful, such an attempt in the GA to retroactively block the creation of a mandate brought forward by the Human Rights Council represented a new and troubling tactic - anti-right actors are now working to directly undermine the HRC’s authority respective to the General Assembly.
Another approach targeted the Fifth Committee (responsible for administration and budgetary matters) as an entry point to attack the mandate. In an unprecedented move a number of States attempted (again, unsuccessfully) to block the funding of UN human rights experts, including the new IE on SOGI[2],.
While these multiple efforts were unsuccessful in blocking the creation and continuation of the new mandate, the significant support they received, the novel strategizing employed, and the strong alliances built along regional lines through negotiations point to difficulties ahead.
[1] The Third Committee of the GA deals with agenda items relating to a range of social, humanitarian affairs, and human rights issues. Each year it discusses and issues resolutions on issues including the advancement of women, the protection of children, family, and youth.
[2] While UN Special Procedures experts (i.e. Special Rapporteurs, Working Group members and Independent Experts) work pro bono, some funds are generally allocated to facilitate country visits on the invitation of the national government, and support staff.
María Cecilia dedicó la mayor parte de su vida a la incorporación de una perspectiva feminista y de género en el trabajo institucional y organizacional y en el de capacitación.
De niña, demostraba fuerte interés en el arte, la comunicación, la naturaleza, la literatura y el logro de la justicia, especialmente para las mujeres y los grupos marginados.
Estaba comprometida con los derechos sexuales y reproductivos y fue parte de la Junta Nacional para la Educación Integral en Sexualidad. Sus seres queridxs la recuerdan como «una luchadora apasionada e incansable» con un profundo compromiso con los derechos de las mujeres y lxs niñxs.
