Over the past few years, a troubling new trend at the international human rights level is being observed, where discourses on ‘protecting the family’ are being employed to defend violations committed against family members, to bolster and justify impunity, and to restrict equal rights within and to family life.
The campaign to "Protect the Family" is driven by ultra-conservative efforts to impose "traditional" and patriarchal interpretations of the family, and to move rights out of the hands of family members and into the institution of ‘the family’.
Since 2014, a group of states have been operating as a bloc in human rights spaces under the name “Group of Friends of the Family”, and resolutions on “Protection of the Family” have been successfully passed every year since 2014.
This agenda has spread beyond the Human Rights Council. We have seen regressive language on “the family” being introduced at the Commission on the Status of Women, and attempts made to introduce it in negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goals.
AWID works with partners and allies to jointly resist “Protection of the Family” and other regressive agendas, and to uphold the universality of human rights.
In response to the increased influence of regressive actors in human rights spaces, AWID joined allies to form the Observatory on the Universality of Rights (OURs). OURs is a collaborative project that monitors, analyzes, and shares information on anti-rights initiatives like “Protection of the Family”.
Rights at Risk, the first OURs report, charts a map of the actors making up the global anti-rights lobby, identifies their key discourses and strategies, and the effect they are having on our human rights.
The report outlines “Protection of the Family” as an agenda that has fostered collaboration across a broad range of regressive actors at the UN. It describes it as: “a strategic framework that houses “multiple patriarchal and anti-rights positions, where the framework, in turn, aims to justify and institutionalize these positions.”
Sauf si vous avez des problèmes d’accessibilité et/ou que vous répondez aux questions de l’enquête dans une autre langue, nous vous encourageons fortement à utiliser KOBO pour une collecte et une analyse standardisées des données WITM.
Contesting the premise that a country’s economy must always ‘grow or die’, de-growth propositions come to debunk the centrality of growth measured by increase in Gross domestic product (GDP).
A de-growth model proposes a shift towards a lower and sustainable level of production and consumption. In essence, shrinking the economic system to leave more space for human cooperation and ecosystems.
The proposal includes
Feminist perspectives within de-growth theory and practice argue that it also needs to redefine and revalidate unpaid and paid, care and market labour to overcome traditional gender stereotypes as well as the prevailing wage gaps and income inequalities that devalue care work.
Mona fue una economista y consultora independiente sobre temas de género y desarrollo.
Fue profesora de economía y Directora del Institute for Women's Studies in the Arab World de la Lebanese American University. Falleció repentinamente el 6 de enero de 2018.
Sus amigxs y ex-colegas dicen sobre Mona: «Cuando celebramos su vida, lo mejor que podemos hacer es comprometernos a continuar con lo que ella empezó: la igualdad de género, indefectiblemente.
Culturellement nomade, née à Hong Kong et enracinée dans un héritage turco-pakistanais, l'amour de Fatima pour les récits - tant pour les lire que pour les cocréer - a alimenté sa passion pour l'activisme à travers la communication. Forte de sa formation en journalisme, Fatima a travaillé pendant 7 ans dans les domaines de la communication numérique et médiatique avec des ONG qui offrent des opportunités d'éducation et de l’aide juridique aux réfugié·e·s et demandeur·se·s d'asile, ainsi qu'avec le mouvement féministe musulman qui applique une perspective féministe et fondée sur les droits dans la compréhension et la quête d’égalité et de justice au sein de la tradition juridique musulmane. Elle rédige régulièrement des tribunes sur les questions féministes dans les pays du Sud.
Grâce à la narration dans cette ère ultra digitale des réseaux sociaux, Fatima continue de collaborer avec des animateur·rice·s communautaires et des activistes de terrain pour créer du contenu audiovisuel dans le but de cultiver des ponts de compréhension vers la libération collective et la décolonisation. Les jours où elle ne travaille pas, elle regarde attentivement des films féministes indépendants venant d’Iran, du Maroc et du Pakistan, et les autres jours elle interprète de la poésie orale avec ses camarades à Kuala Lumpur.
Yes, we invite you to share more on issues that are important to you by responding to the open question(s) at the end of the survey.
Ultra conservative actors have developed a number of discourses at the international human rights level that call on arguments manipulating religion, culture, tradition, and national sovereignty in order to undermine rights related to gender and sexuality.
Anti-rights actors have increasingly moved away from explicitly religious language. Increasingly, we see regressive actors - who may previously have derided human rights concepts - instead manipulating and co-opting these very concepts to further their objectives.
This emerging and successful discourse appears innocuous, but it functions as a useful umbrella theme to house multiple patriarchal and anti-rights positions. The ‘protection of the family’ theme is thus a key example of regressive actors’ move towards holistic and integrated advocacy.
The language of ‘protection of the family’ works to shift the subject of human rights from the individual and onto already powerful institutions.
It also affirms a unitary, hierarchical, and patriarchal conception of the family that discriminates against family forms outside of these rigid boundaries. It also attempts to change the focus from recognition and protection of the rights of vulnerable family members to non-discrimination, autonomy, and freedom from violence in the context of family relations.
The Holy See and a number of Christian Right groups seek to appropriate the right to life in service of an anti-abortion mission. Infusing human rights language with conservative religious doctrine, they argue that the right to life, as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, applies at the moment of conception.
The discourse has no support in any universal human rights instrument. Yet this is an appealing tactic for anti-rights actors, because the right to life cannot be violated under any circumstances and is a binding legal standard.
Anti-rights actors use a number of rhetorical devices in their campaign to undermine sexual rights: they argue that sexual rights do not exist or are ‘new rights,’ that they cause harm to children and society, and/or that these rights stand in opposition to culture, tradition or national laws.
Conservative actors engaged in advocacy at the UN attack the right to comprehensive sexuality education from several directions. They claim that CSE violates ‘parental rights’, harms children, and that it is not education but ideological indoctrination. They also claim that comprehensive sexuality education is pushed on children, parents, and the United Nations by powerful lobbyists seeking to profit from services they provide to children and youth.
Attempts to invalidate rights related to sexual orientation and gender identity have proliferated. Ultra conservative actors argue that application of long-standing human rights principles and law on this issue constitutes the creation of ‘new rights’; and that the meaning of rights should vary radically because they should be interpreted through the lens of ‘culture’ or ‘national particularities.’
Christian Right organizations have been mobilizing against reproductive rights alongside the Holy See and other anti-rights allies for several years. They often argue that reproductive rights are at heart a form of Western-imposed population control over countries in the global South. Ironically, this claim often originates from U.S. and Western Europe-affiliated actors, many of whom actively work to export their fundamentalist discourses and policies.
Regressive actors also cite to ‘scientific’ arguments from ultra-conservative think tanks, and from sources that rely on unsound research methodologies, to suggest that abortion causes an array of psychological, sexual, physical, and relational side effects.
Just as anti-rights actors aim to construct a new category of ‘protection of the family,’ they are attempting to construct a new category of ‘parental rights,’ which has no support in existing human rights standards.
This discourse paradoxically endeavours to use the rights protections with which children are endowed, as articulated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to support the rights of parents to control their children and limit their rights.
Increasingly, anti-rights actors are attempting to infiltrate and subvert standards and discourses developed by women human rights defenders, such as violence against women (VAW).
At the Commission on the Status of Women and other spaces, one rhetorical move is to treat VAW as a concept in which to embed anti-reproductive rights and patriarchal arguments. Ultra conservative actors, for example, have argued that non-heteronormative or traditional intimate partner relationships are a risk factor for violence, and emphasize that fathers are necessary to protect families from violence.
The Holy See has set off a sustained critique of gender, ‘gender ideology’, ‘gender radicals,’ and gender theory, and anti-rights actors often read the term as code for LGBTQ rights. Gender is used by the religious right as a cross-cutting concept that links together many of their discourses. Increasingly, the hysteria on this subject fixates on gender identity and trans rights.
Complementarity of the sexes is a discourse employed by a number of ultra-conservative actors today. Its rhetoric is structured around an assumption of difference: men and women are meant to have differing but complementary roles in marriage and family life, and with respect to their engagement in the community and political and economic life.
Reference to ‘natural’ roles is meant to fundamentally reject universal human rights to equality and non-discrimination.
It is also used to justify State and non-State violations of these rights, and non-compliance with respect to State obligations to eliminate prejudices and practices based on stereotyped roles for men or women.
This discourse suggests that national governments are being unjustly targeted by UN bodies, or by other States acting through the UN. This is an attempt to shift the subject of human rights from the individual or marginalized community suffering a rights violation to a powerful and/or regressive institution - i.e. the state, in order to justify national exceptions from universal rights or to support state impunity.
Anti-rights actors have taken up the discourse of freedom of religion in order to justify violations of human rights. Yet, ultra-conservative actors refer to religious freedom in a way that directly contradicts the purpose of this human right and fundamentally conflicts with the principle of the universality of rights. The inference is that religious liberty is threatened and undermined by the protection of human rights, particularly those related to gender and sexuality.
The central move is to suggest that the right to freedom of religion is intended to protect a religion rather than those who are free to hold or not hold different religious beliefs.
Yet under international human rights law, the right protects believers rather than beliefs, and the right to freedom of religion, thought and conscience includes the right not to profess any religion or belief or to change one’s religion or belief.
The deployment of references to culture and tradition to undermine human rights, including the right to equality, is a common tactic amongst anti-rights actors. Culture is presented as monolithic, static, and immutable, and it is is often presented in opposition to ‘Western norms.’
Allusions to culture by anti-rights actors in international policy debates aim to undermine the universality of rights, arguing for cultural relativism that trumps or limits rights claims. Regressive actors’ use of cultural rights is founded on a purposeful misrepresentation of the human right. States must ensure that traditional or cultural attitudes are not used to justify violations of equality, and human rights law calls for equal access, participation and contribution in all aspects of cultural life for all, including women, religious, and racial minorities, and those with non-conforming genders and sexualities.
Anti-rights actors in international policy spaces increasingly manipulate references to universal or fundamental human rights to reverse the meaning of the universality of rights.
Rather than using the term universal to describe the full set of indivisible and interrelated human rights, ultra conservative actors employ this term to instead delineate and describe a subset of human rights as ‘truly fundamental.’ Other rights would thus be subject to State discretion, ‘new’ rights or optional. This discourse is especially powerful as their category of the truly universal remains unarticulated and hence open to shifting interpretation.
Ursula était une romancière américaine dont les genres littéraires de prédilection étaient la science-fiction et le genre fantastique.
Elle a connu le succès grâce à son roman « La main gauche de la nuit », où elle imagine une société du futur où les personnes sont ambisexuelles - leur sexe n’est pas déterminé. Parmi les premiers grands livres de science-fiction féministes, ce roman explore les influences du genre et du sexe dans la société. Ursula était une source d'inspiration pour ses écrits subversifs et originaux, ainsi que pour les thèmes du féminisme et de la liberté qui lui tenaient tellement à cœur.
En 1983, lors d'un discours au Mills College en Californie, elle a déclaré aux diplômé-e-s : « Pourquoi une femme libre ayant suivi une formation universitaire devrait-elle combattre Macho-Man ou le servir ? Pourquoi devrait-elle vivre sa vie selon son bon vouloir ? J'espère que vous vivrez sans avoir besoin de dominer et sans avoir besoin d'être dominé-e ».
Los datos se procesarán para fines estadísticos y así arrojar luz sobre el estado de la dotación de recursos para los movimientos feministas de todo el mundo, y solo se exhibirán de forma desglosada. AWID no divulgará información acerca de ninguna organización en particular ni publicará información que permita identificar a una organización por su ubicación o características sin el consentimiento acreditado de dicha organización.
Nuestro nuevo documento de investigación El diablo se esconde en los detalles aborda la falta de conocimientos sobre los fundamentalismos religiosos en el sector del desarrollo, y se propone comprender mejor de qué manera estos fundamentalismos inhiben el desarrollo y, en particular, los derechos de las mujeres. Propone recomendaciones para que quienes trabajan en temas de desarrollo desafíen la labor de los fundamentalismos y eviten fortalecerlos inadvertidamente. [CTA download link: Leer el documento completo]
| Graphic1 | 1. Control of women’s bodies, sexuality, and choice are “warning signs” of rising fundamentalisms. |
| 2. Neoliberal economic policies have a particularly negative impact on women, and fuel the growth of religious fundamentalisms. | Graphic2 |
| Graphic3 | 3. Choosing religious organizations as default for partnerships builds their legitimacy and access to resources, and supports their ideology, including gender ideology. |
| 4.Everyone has multiple identities and should be defined by more than just their religion. Foregrounding religious identities tends to reinforce the power of religious fundamentalists. | Graphic4 |
| Graphic5 | 5. Religion, culture, and tradition are constantly changing, being reinterpreted and challenged. What is dominant is always a question of power. |
| 6. Racism, exclusion, and marginalization all add to the appeal of fundamentalists’ offer of a sense of belonging and a “cause”. | Graphic6 |
| Graphic7 | 7. There is strong evidence that the single most important factor in promoting women’s rights and gender equality is an autonomous women’s movement. |
El Diablo se esconde en los detalles proporciona detalles de las graves violaciones a los derechos humanos y, en particular, de las violaciones a los derechos de las mujeres, causados por los fundamentalismos auspiciados por los Estados, así como por actores fundamentalistas no estatales como milicias, organizaciones comunitarias confesionales e individuos. La profundización fundamentalista de normas sociales atávicas y patriarcales está provocando el aumento de la violencia contra las mujeres, las niñas y las defensoras de derechos humanos (WHRDs). El informe propuesta estas ideas clave para abordar el problema:
Quienes trabajan en el desarrollo están de capacidad de asumir una posición más firme. Su capacidad colectiva para reconocer y enfrentar conjuntamente a los fundamentalismos religiosos resulta crucial para promover la justicia social, económica y de género y los derechos humanos de todas las personas en el marco del desarrollo sostenible. Resulta fundamental promover que el poder y los privilegios se entiendan desde la óptica del feminismo interseccional y aplicar esta comprensión a los interrogantes sobre religión y cultura. Las organizaciones de mujeres ya poseen conocimientos y estrategias para oponerse a los fundamentalismos. Quienes trabajan en el desarrollo deberían apoyarse en estos e invertir en coaliciones enfocadas en múltiples temáticas. Lo anterior, les ayudará a alcanzar nuevos horizontes.
From India, Janette was feisty, formidable, compassionate and loving.
Janette’s intolerance of injustice and fierce commitment to standing up for all people’s rights led her to work at TARSHI (an NGO that works on sexuality and sexual and reproductive health and rights) for more than 15 years. Janette ably managed and led the finance, human resources and operations aspects of TARSHI’s work, adeptly navigating the labyrinthine bureaucracy to which Indian NGOs are subjected.
Her team remembers that “She stood watch so we could steer well in open waters. A woman of many talents, Janette not only helped us procure our own office space but also designed it for optimal usage.She loved travel and animals and was interested in animal assisted therapy."
A dynamic network of people around the world, AWID members are researchers, academics, students, educators, activists, business people, policy-makers, development practitioners, funders, and more. Our members - of every age - are those who make AWID a unique global feminist association.
We offer different types of memberships geared to income level and whether you are an individual or an organization. Currently we have over 5000 members, individual and institutional, from 164 countries.
We collaborate for advocacy on specific issues, members vote in elections for our Board, and can also participate in and contribute to our Priority Areas through webinars, surveys, or urgent actions, for example.
Our institutional membership draws from a broad range of organizations interested in advancing gender justice and women’s human rights, including women’s rights organizations, from the local to the global levels, grassroots networks, major international institutions, government departments, university programs and more. 63% of our members are from the global South and 38% are under the age of 30.
Oeuvrez pour le renforcement des mouvements pour les droits des femmes et contribuez aux transformations en faveur des droits humains.
Non. L’enquête s’appuie sur les 20 années de mobilisation de l’AWID dans l’objectif d’obtenir davantage de financement de meilleure qualité pour des changements sociaux menés par des féministes. Cette enquête est la troisième édition de la recherche Où est l’argent pour l’organisation des mouvements féministes? Notre objectif est de mener une enquête WITM tous les 3 ans.