Maria Margarita Che Chub
Protection of the Family
The Issue
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’.
“Protection of the Family” efforts stem from:
- rising traditionalism,
- rising cultural, social and religious conservatism and
- sentiment hostile to women’s human rights, sexual rights, child rights and the rights of persons with non-normative gender identities and sexual orientations.
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.
Our Approach
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.”
Related Content
Snippet FEA The fight for a world full of workplaces (ES)
La lucha por un mundo lleno de lugares de trabajo libres de todas formas de discriminación, estigma y exclusión es digna. Un mundo en el que el trabajo sexual sea descriminalizado y reconocido como trabajo es parte integrante de esto.
Un mundo donde todxs lxs trabajadorxs tengan condiciones de trabajo seguras, salarios dignos y puedan disfrutar de los mismos derechos como el acceso a la salud, pensiones, permisos por enfermedad, vacaciones, seguridad laboral y más, sin importar su género, raza, etnia, edad o capacidad.
Los derechos laborales son cuestiones feministas, y los sindicatos feministas desempeñan un papel clave en la promoción de los derechos legales, laborales y económicos de todxs lxs trabajadorxs, especialmente lxs trabajadorxs migrantes, lxs trabajadorxs domésticxs, lxs trabajadorxs informales y lxs trabajadorxs sexuales. Estas son personas que recientemente se han visto afectadas de manera desproporcionada por la pandemia, su crisis de cuidados, los confinamientos, toques de queda y el aumento de la vigilancia y represión policial.
Aquí les presentamos las historias de activistas feministas y sindicalistas que luchan por mejores condiciones de trabajo y mejores mundos para todxs.
Key opposition discourses
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.
Protection of the family
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 Right to Life
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.
Sexual rights
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.’
Reproductive Rights
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.
Protection of children and parental rights
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.
Violence against women
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.
Gender and ‘gender ideology’
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 and human dignity
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.
National sovereignty and anti-imperialism
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.
Religious freedom
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.
Cultural rights and traditional values
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.
Subverting ‘universal’
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.
Other Chapters
Snippet - WITM Why now_col 1 - RU
Почему сейчас?
Феминистские движения, движения за права женщин, гендерную справедливость, ЛГБТКИ+ и смежные движения по всему миру переживают критический момент, сталкиваясь с мощной негативной реакцией на ранее завоеванные права и свободы. Последние годы привели к быстрому росту авторитаризма, жестоким репрессиям в отношении гражданского общества и криминализации правозащитниц(-ков) с разнообразной гендерной самоидентификацией, эскалации войн и конфликтов во многих частях света, продолжающейся экономической несправедливости, – и все это на фоне кризиса в области здравоохранения, экологии и климата.
So'oalo Roger
So'oalo was a fervent human rights advocate, especially pertaining to the rights of the LGBTQI community in the Pacific.
She was a member of the Samoa Fa’afafine Association (SFA) and a passionate advocate for the acknowledgement of a third gender in the island country. Under her leadership, the SFA pushed for the recognition of the validity and rights of the fa’afafine community.
She was also a pioneer in articulating the links between human rights, exploitation of fa’afafines in Samoa and the Pacific, and the health, wellbeing and security of the LGBTQI community.
She was an inspiration, a visionary and her dedication to the pursuit of rights for her community is admirable and will be remembered.
Snippet FEA Georgia's minimum wage (FR)
Le salaire minimum en Géorgie est l’un des plus bas dans le monde. Cette réalité touche surtout les femmes.
Non seulement le pays a un écart de rémunération important entre les genres, mais les femmes travaillent également des heures plus longues et moins réglementées avant de rentrer chez elles pour s'occuper des tâches ménagères et de leur famille. Il n'y a pas de congé de maternité, pas d'augmentation de salaire pour les heures supplémentaires, pas d'assurance-chômage, et pas de congé de maladie ou d'autre protection sociale. Sous la pression d’organisations occidentales, les partis politiques oligarchiques géorgiens ont mis en œuvre des réformes qui détruisent l'État-providence, augmentent les mesures d'austérité et aggravent l'exploitation des travailleur·euses, le tout au profit des grandes entreprises qui applaudissent le pays pour sa «facilité à faire des affaires». Les médias, cooptés par des intérêts privés et corporatifs, sont partiaux sur ces questions ou les réduisent au silence. L'organisation syndicale reste l'une des rares options pour lutter pour les droits humains fondamentaux et pour tenir l'État et les entreprises responsables des violations et persécutions quotidiennes et généralisées contre les travailleur·euses, et en particulier les femmes.
Source: Minimum-Wage et entretien avec Sopo Japaridze dans Open Democracy
Susana Chavez
When development initiatives, religious fundamentalisms and the state of women’s rights collide
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]
Seven pointers to consider
| 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. |
Auge global de los fundamentalismos religiosos.
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:
- [icon] Fundamentalismos religiosos están ganando terreno en el seno de las comunidades
- [icon] Sistemas políticos
- [icon] Escenarios internacionales, con efectos devastadores para la gente común y para las mujeres en particular.
Los agentes de desarrollo deben actuar urgentemente.
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.
Snippet - WITM Our objectives - AR
أهداف استطلاع "أين المال"
|
تقديم تحليل محدّث، قوي، مبني على الأدلة ومسيّر نحو النشاط عن وقائع التمويل النسوي للتنظيمات النسوية ووضع البيئة التمويلية النسوية لأعضاء وعضوات AWID، الشركاء/ الشريكات في الحركة والممولين/ات. |
1 |
|
|
تحديد وإظهار الفرص للتحول لتمويل أفضل وأكبر للحركات النسوية، لكشف الحلول الزائفة ووقف التوجه الذي يجعل التمويل يتحرك ضد الأجندات التقاطعية أو أجندات العدالة الجندرية. |
2 |
|
|
تحديد الرؤى المقترحات والأجندات النسوية، لتمويل يحقق العدالة. |
3 |
|
Samira Khalil
Samira fue una activista siria bajo el régimen de Bashar al-Asad.
Desde muy joven, se opuso a todas las formas de despotismo, especialmente en relación al régimen autoritario en el que vivía. En 2013, Samira fue secuestrada junto a otrxs tres destacadxs activistas. Se cree que se la llevaron del Centro para la Documentación de Violaciones de Duma, en el área rural de Damasco.
El principal sospechoso de su desaparición es el Ejército del Islam (el cual niega estar involucrado). No ha habido una investigación formal de la desaparición de Samira y desde entonces no se ha sabido nada de ella. Samira estaba comprometida con su país y se negaba a abandonar Siria hasta tanto no sintiera que su trabajo por el empoderamiento de las mujeres y en la documentación de los crímenes ya no fuera necesario.
Body
Snippet FEA collaborator and allies Photo 5 (EN)
Rhonda Copelon
Here is your Feminist Realities Toolkit
Thank you for taking the first steps to Co-create Feminist Realities!
Learn more about Feminist Realities
Any questions? Please do not hesitate to contact us
Кому следует принять участие в опросе?
Группы, организации и движения, работающие исключительно или главным образом в интересах женщин, девочек, гендерной справедливости, прав ЛГБТКИ+ людей во всех регионах и на всех уровнях, как недавно созданные, так и давно существующие.
Dora Nkem Akunyili
Née dans l'État de Benue, au Nigeria, Dora était une pharmacienne experte et érudite ainsi qu’une dirigeante communautaire de renommée mondiale.
Lorsqu'elle est devenue directrice générale de l'Agence nationale pour la gestion et le contrôle des aliments et drogues (NAFDAC) entre 2001 et 2008, son travail d’envergure révolutionnaire a initié un changement de paradigme au sein de la fonction publique nigériane. Au cours de son mandat, elle a mené des réformes dans l'application des politiques et des réglementations qui ont permis de réduire de manière radicale le nombre de faux médicaments qui ont affecté le secteur pharmaceutique nigérian.
Après avoir incarné la réalité d’une femme courageuse et compétente qui a défié les maux d’une société à dominante patriarcale et qui a conduit au changement, elle est devenue une icône de l’émancipation des femmes. Entre 2008 et 2010 elle a été nommée ministre de l'Information et de la Communication.
Elle est décédée des suites d'un cancer et laisse dans le deuil son mari, ses six enfants et ses trois petits-enfants.
Snippet FEA lines of work Against (ES)
