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.”
There are varied conceptualizations about the commons notes activist and scholar Soma Kishore Parthasarathy.
Conventionally, they are understood as natural resources intended for use by those who depend on their use. However, the concept of the commons has expanded to include the resources of knowledge, heritage, culture, virtual spaces, and even climate. It pre-dates the individual property regime and provided the basis for organization of society. Definitions given by government entities limit its scope to land and material resources.
The concept of the commons rests on the cultural practice of sharing livelihood spaces and resources as nature’s gift, for the common good, and for the sustainability of the common.
Under increasing threat, nations and market forces continue to colonize, exploit and occupy humanity’s commons.
In some favourable contexts, the ‘commons’ have the potential to enable women, especially economically oppressed women, to have autonomy in how they are able to negotiate their multiple needs and aspirations.
Patriarchy is reinforced when women and other oppressed genders are denied access and control of the commons.
Therefore, a feminist economy seeks to restore the legitimate rights of communities to these common resources. This autonomy is enabling them to sustain themselves; while evolving more egalitarian systems of governance and use of such resources. A feminist economy acknowledges women’s roles and provides equal opportunities for decision-making, i.e. women as equal claimants to these resources.
Related content
Telesur: Another Activist Murder Linked to Canadian Mining in Guatemala
Guatemala Human Rights Commission: Two Defenders Killed in January
IM Defensoras: Assailants kill territorial defender, Laura Leonor Vásquez
“Nous Sommes la Solution has a vision of an Africa where, in solidarity, rural women involved in decision-making can grow, process, sell and consume family farming products while preserving the environment, for a harmonious and sustainable development.”
Lo personal es político, y la apasionada y valiente Nadyn Jouny personificó este mantra feminista. Nadyn experimentó de primera mano el dolor de la violencia estructural de los sistemas legales que despojan a las mujeres de sus derechos.
Cuando Nadyn decidió solicitar el divorcio, los tribunales religiosos chiítas, bajo las Leyes de Estatuto Personal Libanesas, le negaron la custodia de su joven hijo Karam. Nadyn, como tantas otras mujeres del Líbano y de otros países, se vio atrapada entre el dolor imposible de dejar una relación no deseada y abusiva y de perder a la vez los derechos sobre su hijo. Sin embargo, Nadyn se defendió, y lo habría de hacerlo hasta el último día.
Nadyn utilizó su habilidad con los medios de comunicación para convertirse en una voz franca a favor de las mujeres que luchan contra la discriminación en la legislación familiar, en el Líbano y a nivel internacional. Nadyn cofundó el grupo autofinanciado "Protecting Lebanese Women" [Protegiendo a las Mujeres Libanesas] (PLW, por sus siglas en inglés) y se unió a muchas otras madres libanesas que se enfrentaban a problemas similares de custodia. Juntas, trabajaron para crear conciencia sobre las injusticias extremas a las que se enfrentaban, a nivel nacional, protestaron ante los tribunales religiosos por sus derechos y, a nivel internacional, llamaron la atención de los medios de comunicación.
Nadyn también trabajó con ABAAD - Resource Center for Gender Equality [Centro de Recursos para la Igualdad de Género], otra organización por los derechos de las mujeres en el Líbano, para realizar campañas en favor de los derechos de las mujeres, la igualdad en la legislación familiar y relativa a las custodias y contra los matrimonios forzados y precoces.
Para muchxs de sus colegas, Nadyn llegó a "simbolizar la lucha de una madre libanesa contra la supresión y la misoginia de todo tipo" (en inglés), al utilizar "su experiencia personal y trayectoria individual de empoderamiento, dio a otras mujeres esperanza para que ellas también pudieran ser un catalizador para el cambio positivo" - ABAAD - Centro de Recursos para la Igualdad entre los Géneros, Líbano.
El 6 de octubre de 2019, Nadyn murió trágicamente en un accidente de automóvil cuando se dirigía a protestar por los injustos aumentos de impuestos en un país que ya se enfrentaba a una espiral de crisis financiera. Nadyn Jouny tenía solo 29 años en el momento de su muerte.
Despite their rigidity in matters of doctrine and worldview, anti-rights actors have demonstrated an openness to building new kinds of strategic alliances, to new organizing techniques, and to new forms of rhetoric. As a result, their power in international spaces has increased.
There has been a notable evolution in the strategies of ultra conservative actors operating at this level. They do not only attempt to tinker at the edges of agreements and block certain language, but to transform the framework conceptually and develop alternative standards and norms, and avenues for influence.
Ultra conservative actors work to create and sustain their relationships with State delegates through regular training opportunities - such as the yearly Global Family Policy Forum - and targeted training materials.
These regular trainings and resources systematically brief delegates on talking points and negotiating techniques to further collaboration towards anti-rights objectives in the human rights system. Delegates also receive curated compilations of ‘consensus language’ and references to pseudo-scientific or statistical information to bolster their arguments.
The consolidated transmission of these messages explains in part why State delegates who take ultra-conservative positions in international human rights debates frequently do so in contradiction with their own domestic legislation and policies.
Anti-rights actors’ regional and international web of meetings help create closer links between ultra conservative Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), States and State blocs, and powerful intergovernmental bodies. The yearly international World Congress of Families is one key example.
These convenings reinforce personal connections and strategic alliances, a key element for building and sustaining movements. They facilitate transnational, trans-religious and dynamic relationship-building around shared issues and interests, which leads to a more proactive approach and more holistic sets of asks at the international policy level on the part of anti-rights actors.
States and State blocs have historically sought to undermine international consensus or national accountability under international human rights norms through reservations to human rights agreements, threatening the universal applicability of human rights.
The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) has received by far the most reservations, most of which are based on alleged conflict with religious law. It is well-established international human rights law that evocations of tradition, culture or religion cannot justify violations of human rights, and many reservations to CEDAW are invalid as they are “incompatible with the object and purpose” of CEDAW. Nevertheless, reference to these reservations is continually used by States to dodge their human rights responsibilities.
‘Reservations’ to UN documents and agreements that are not formal treaties - such as Human Rights Council and General Assembly resolutions - are also on the rise.
In an alarming development, regressive actors at the UN have begun to co-opt existing rights standards and campaign to develop agreed language that is deeply anti-rights.
The aim is to create and then propagate language in international human rights spaces that validates patriarchal, hierarchical, discriminatory, and culturally relativist norms.
One step towards this end is the drafting of declarative texts, such as the World Family Declaration and the San Jose Articles, that pose as soft human rights law. Sign-ons are gathered from multiple civil society, state, and institutional actors; and they are then used a basis for advocacy and lobbying.
As part of a strategic shift towards the use of non-religious discourses, anti-rights actors have significantly invested in their own ‘social science’ think tanks. Given oxygen by the growing conservative media, materials from these think tanks are then widely disseminated by conservative civil society groups. The same materials are used as the basis for advocacy at the international human rights level.
While the goals and motivation of conservative actors derive from their extreme interpretations of religion, culture, and tradition, such regressive arguments are often reinforced through studies that claim intellectual authority. A counter-discourse is thus produced through a heady mix of traditionalist doctrine and social science.
This is one of the most effective strategies employed by the religious right and represents a major investment in the future of anti-rights organizing.
Youth recruitment and leadership development, starting at the local level with churches and campuses, are a priority for many conservative actors engaged at the international policy level.
This strategy has allowed for infiltration of youth-specific spaces at the United Nations, including at the Commission on the Status of Women, and creates a strong counterpoint to progressive youth networks and organizations.
When it comes to authoritative expert mechanisms like the UN Special Procedures and Treaty Monitoring Bodies and operative bodies like the UN agencies, regressive groups realize their potential for influence is much lower than with political mechanisms[1].
In response, anti-rights groups spread the idea that UN agencies are ‘overstepping their mandate,’ that the CEDAW Committee and other Treaty Bodies have no authority to interpret their treaties, or that Special Procedures are partisan experts working outside of their mandate. Anti-rights groups have also successfully lobbied for the defunding of agencies such as the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
This invalidation of UN mechanisms gives fuel to state impunity. Governments, when under international scrutiny, can defend their action on the basis that the reviewing mechanism is itself faulty or overreaching.
Conservative non-state actors increasingly invest in social media and other online platforms to promote their activities, campaign, and widely share information from international human rights spaces.
The Spanish organization CitizenGo, for example, markets itself as the conservative version of Change.org, spearheading petitions and letter-writing campaigns. One recent petition, opposing the establishment of a UN international day on safe abortion, gathered over 172,000 signatures.
By understanding the strategies employed by anti-rights actors, we can be more effective in countering them.
[1] The fora that are state-led, like the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council, and UN conferences like the Commission on the Status of Women and the Commission on Population and Development
Janet Benshoof était une avocate des droits humains oeuvrant aux États-Unis et défenseure de l’égalité des femmes et de leurs droits sexuels et reproductifs.
Elle a milité pour l’élargissement de l’accès à la contraception et à l’avortement dans le monde entier, et s’est battue contre des décisions anti-avortement dans le territoire américain de Guam. Arrêtée en 1990 pour son opposition à la loi anti-avortement la plus restrictive de son pays, elle a remporté une mise en demeure [MB1] au tribunal local à Guam qui a bloqué la loi, pour ensuite remporter l’affaire devant la Cour d’Appel de Ninth Circuit, décision qui devait supprimer définitivement celle-ci.
« Les femmes à Guam sont dans une situation absolument dramatique. Je n’ai nullement l’intention d’arrêter d’en parler », Janet Benshoof pour People Magazine
Janet a créé plusieurs précédents juridiques, dont l’approbation par l’US Food and Drug Administration de la contraception d’urgence, ainsi que l’application du droit international afin de garantir leurs droits aux victimes de viol lors des poursuites pour crimes de guerre de l’époque de Saddam Hussein, devant la Cour Suprême iraqienne.
Janet était présidente et fondatrice du Global Justice Center, ainsi que fondatrice du Center for Reproductive Rights, la première organisation internationale pour les droits humains, centrée sur le choix reproductif et l’égalité. Elle a siégé pendant 15 ans en tant que directrice du projet pour les droits reproductifs de l’American Civil Liberties Union, où elle a mené de nombreuses procédures juridiques qui ont contribué à façonner la loi constitutionnelle des États-Unis sur l’égalité de genre, la liberté d’expression et les droits reproductifs.
« Janet était connue pour son brillant esprit juridique, son sens de l’humour vif et son courage face à l’injustice », Anthony D. Romero.
Nommée l’une des « 100 avocat·e·s les plus influent·e·s d’Amérique » par le National Law Journal, Janet a reçu de nombreux prix et distinctions.
Née en mai 1947, Janet est décédée en décembre 2017.
While active participants on the front lines of protests and uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), women became invisible, absent from processes of formation of the new states, and excluded from decision-making roles, responsibilities, and positions in the aftermath of the uprisings. Except in rare cases, men dominated leadership positions in transitional structures, including the constitutional reform and electoral committees[i]. Subsequent elections brought very few women to parliamentary and ministerial positions.
Additionally, a strong and immediate backlash against women and women’s rights has clearly emerged in the aftermath. The rise of new religious fundamentalist groups with renewed patriarchal agendas aiming to obliterate previous gains of the women’s movements even in countries with longer histories of women’s rights, such as Tunisia, has been very alarming.
The varying contexts of governance and transition processes across the MENA countries presents an important opportunity for women human rights defenders to shape the future of these democracies. However, the lack of prioritization of women’s rights issues in the emerging transitions and the aforementioned backlash have posed a variety of complex challenges for the women’s movements. Faced with these enormous challenges and possibilities, women’s rights activists have been struggling to forge ahead a democratic future inclusive and only possible with women’s rights and equality. The particular historical and contextual legacies that impact women’s movements in each country continue to bear on the current capacities, strategies, and overall preparedness of the women’s movements to take on such a challenge. Burdened with daily human rights violations in one context, with lack of resources and tools in another, with organizational tensions in a third, in addition to the constant attacks on them as activists, women human rights defenders have voiced their desire to be more equipped with knowledge and tools to be effective and proactive in engaging with these fast-changing environments. Conceptual clarity and greater understanding of notions and practices of democratization, transitional justice tools and mechanisms, political governance and participation processes, international and local mechanisms, movement building strategies, constitutional reform possibilities, and secularization of public space and government are important steps to defining future strategic action.
It is clear that feminists and women’s rights activists cannot wait for women’s rights to be addressed after transitions – issues must be addressed as the new power configurations are forming. Experiences of earlier moments of transition, namely from colonial rule, have clearly demonstrated that women’s rights have to be inherently part of the transition movement towards a more just and equal society.
This publication represents a research mapping of key resources, publications and materials on transitions to democracy and women’s rights in different countries of the world that have undergone such processes, such as: Indonesia, Chile, South Africa, Nepal, Mexico, Argentina, Poland, Ukraine, as well as within the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). It provides bibliographic information and short summaries of resources which succinctly identify the contextual changes and challenges facing women in those particular transitional moments, as well as clearly delineates the ways in which women’s rights activists sought to confront those challenges and what lessons were learned.
A key criterion in the selection process was the primacy of a women’s rights/feminist perspective; the few exceptions to this rule offer a unique and, we hope, useful, perspective on the issues that women’s rights organizations and activists face in the region. The texts have been selected to provide a wide range of information, relevant to women human rights defenders working from the grassroots to the international level, across issues (including different case studies and examples), from different perspectives (international human rights bodies, academic institutions, NGO contributions, activists’ experiences, etc.), and at a wide range of levels of complexity, in order to respond to the needs of as many readers as possible.
Nous Sommes la Solution élève et développe le leadership des femmes rurales travaillant à des solutions africaines pour la souveraineté alimentaire.
Mena Mangal was a prominent TV journalist, women’s rights advocate and cultural adviser to Wolesi Jirga, the lower house of Afghanistan's national parliament.
For more than a decade, she worked for Ariana TV, Tolo TV's Pashto-language channel Lamar, and the private Afghan national television broadcaster Shamshad TV. As a presenter, Mena focused on women’s rights and cultural talk shows.
"Women's rights activist Wazhma Frogh said Mangal "had a loud voice" and actively spoke out as an advocate for her people."
Off-screen, she also ran popular social media pages that advocated for the rights of Afghan girls and women to education and work. In terms of her private life, Mena wrote extensively about being forced into an arranged marriage in 2017 and the process she had to go through to finally obtain a divorce.
In a Facebook post, Mena wrote she was receiving death threats from unknown sources but would continue to carry out her work.
On 11 May 2019, she was attacked by unknown gunmen and shot dead in broad daylight in a public space in Southeast Kabul.
"We are concerned about the situation because it has a direct impact on women who work outside their homes...Female journalists are changing their professions due to the increasing risks they are facing." - Robina Hamdard, Kabul-based women’s rights activist.
@shalinikonanur sharing a comment by her colleague debbie @salco "we can talk about shattering the glass ceiling, but we have to talk about who are sweeping those broken glasses?" challenging the #G7 to truly see who's vulnerable domestically & globally #W7Canada @kramdas @AWID pic.twitter.com/1rs0SpLYHp
— Tenzin Dolker cyclone (@T_Dolker) 25 de abril de 2018
A workplace does not have to operate on competition and profit. It does not have to exploit people for the benefit of the owner and a small elite either.
Instead, communities on the margins of formal economies are building cooperative models based on autonomy, cooperation, shared responsibility, self-management and solidarity.
Worker-controlled cooperatives and workplaces have always offered alternative ways of generating employment opportunities, income, social security and savings - while distributing revenues in more communal, sustainable and safer ways.
But it is more than an employment opportunity: it is the making of dreams into a reality, and the building of feminist economies based on solidarity and care for each other. It is about creating a world where our lives, our labor and our communities matter.
This is the story of the Nadia Echazú Textile Cooperative, the first social enterprise managed by and for travesti and trans people in Argentina.
«Quiero transmitir el siguiente mensaje a todos los tunecinos y tunecinas: Tenemos que unirnos para decir no a la censura y a los juicios contra el derecho a opinar.» - Lina Ben Mhenni (entrevista de 2013)
«Es cierto que la información y la Internet son importantes, pero para hacer una revolución es crucial estar en el territorio. Algunas personas aquí en Túnez piensan que el cambio se dará mediante un simple “me gusta” en Internet. Yo creo que hay que estar activxs en el terreno. Y, por supuesto, que hay que combinar las acciones en el terreno con la acción en las redes.» - Lina Ben Mhenni (entrevista en POCIT)
En 2010 co-organizó una protesta que desafió la decisión gubernamental de suprimir medios de comunicación e instalar la censura de Internet. Lina era muy conocida por su blog «A Tunisian Girl», y por su trabajo durante la revolución tunecina de 2011. En su blog, difundió la información sobre el levantamiento, compartió imágenes que documentaban las protestas, y fue una de las pocas voces que hablaron sobre los asesinatos y la represión de lxs manifestantes de Sidi Bouzid. Lina publicaba en su blog utilizando su nombre real en lugar de un seudónimo que protegiera su identidad, y fue una de lxs pocxs bloguerxs en hacerlo.
«Nuestra libertad de expresión corre verdadero peligro. Me temo que estamos perdiendo los extraordinarios frutos de la revolución: la desaparición del miedo y nuestra libertad de expresión. Tenemos que seguir luchando para proteger y preservar este derecho.» - Lina Ben Mhenni (entrevista de 2013)
Lina tenía solamente 36 años cuando falleció, el 27 de enero de 2020, debido a complicaciones derivadas de una enfermedad autoinmune.
«Libertad, mejor educación y mejor salud—eso era lo que todxs queríamos. Cuando fracasábamos, ella nos empujaba.» - Hala, maestra de Lina
As you plan the activity you would like to do at the Forum, please also consider how you will fund your participation. Typical Costs include: accommodation, travel, visa, forum registration fees, etc.
It is important to note that this Forum will have many ‘open spaces’ and moments for movements to learn and exchange, but fewer formal sessions. (See “Ways to describe the Forum in your fundraising” below for language to use in your outreach.)
Reach out to your current donors first : Your best option is always a current funder that you have.
Make sure to do it in advance : We recommend contacting them by early 2020 at the latest. Many funders who support feminist organizations have some budget allocated for Forum travel. Others may be able to include it in renewal grants or through other travel funds.
If your group has funders, tell them that you want to attend the AWID Forum to learn, experience, exchange and network- even if your activity does not get selected for the final program. In order to be able to support your participation, your donors will need to know about it well in advance so tell them right away! (they are already deciding which funds they will distribute in 2020).
If you do not currently have donor support or are not able to secure grants for Forum travel, consider reaching out to new donors.
Deadlines and requirements vary by funder, and a grant review process can take many months. If you’re considering applying for new grants, do so as soon as possible.
Feminist movements have long gotten creative with funding our own activism. Here are some ideas that we have gathered to inspire alternative ways of fundraising:
For more inspiration, see AWID’s ongoing series on autonomous resourcing, including specific ideas for conference raising participation funds.
AWID strives to make the Forum a truly global gathering with participation from diverse movements, regions and generations. To this end, AWID mobilizes resources for a limited Access Fund (AF) to assist Forum participants with the costs of attending the Forum.
AWID’s Access Fund will provide support to a limited number of Forum participants and session/activity facilitators. You can indicate in your application if you would like to apply to the AWID Access Fund. This is not guaranteed, and we strongly encourage you to seek alternative funding for your participation and travel to the Forum.
Even if you apply for the AWID Access Fund, we encourage you to continue to explore other options to fund your participation in the Forum. Access Fund decisions will be confirmed by the end of June 2020. Please remember that these resources are very limited, and we will be unable to support all applicants.
As you reach out to funders or your own networks, here is some sample messaging that may be helpful. Feel free to adapt it in whatever way is useful for you!
The AWID Forum is a co-created feminist movement space that energizes participants in their own activism, and strengthens connections with others across multiple rights and justice movements. Participants get to draw from wells of hope, energy and radical imagination, as well as deepen shared analysis, learning, and build cross-movement solidarity to develop more integrated agendas and advance joint strategies.
Our organization is seeking funds to attend the Forum in order to connect with other activists and movements from around the world, strengthen our strategies, and share our work. We are inspired by past participants, who have described the power of this global feminist gathering:
“Over four days … voices weaved together into a global perspective on the state of gender equality. And when I say global, I mean simultaneous translation into seven languages kind of global ....”
“It was reminding us that we are not alone. The Forum provided a means of translating collectivity into our movements. Whether across ideologies, identities or borders, our strength is in our vision and our support of one another.”
It is important to note that this Forum will have many ‘open spaces’ and moments for movements to learn and exchange, but fewer formal sessions. While many attendees will not be presenting in formal sessions, there will be invaluable space to learn, strategize, and experience feminist movements’ collective power in action.
When calculating your costs and how much you need to raise, it is important to factor in costs that may come up. Here’s an example of key items to consider:
The AWID Forum will now take place 11-14 January 2021 in Taipei .
It is more than a four-day convening. It is one more stop on a movement strengthening journey around Feminist Realities that has already begun and will continue well beyond the Forum dates.
