Young feminist activists play a critical role in women’s rights organizations and movements worldwide by bringing up new issues that feminists face today. Their strength, creativity and adaptability are vital to the sustainability of feminist organizing.
At the same time, they face specific impediments to their activism such as limited access to funding and support, lack of capacity-building opportunities, and a significant increase of attacks on young women human rights defenders. This creates a lack of visibility that makes more difficult their inclusion and effective participation within women’s rights movements.
AWID’s young feminist activism program was created to make sure the voices of young women are heard and reflected in feminist discourse. We want to ensure that young feminists have better access to funding, capacity-building opportunities and international processes. In addition to supporting young feminists directly, we are also working with women’s rights activists of all ages on practical models and strategies for effective multigenerational organizing.
We want young feminist activists to play a role in decision-making affecting their rights by:
Fostering community and sharing information through the Young Feminist Wire. Recognizing the importance of online media for the work of young feminists, our team launched the Young Feminist Wire in May 2010 to share information, build capacity through online webinars and e-discussions, and encourage community building.
Researching and building knowledge on young feminist activism, to increase the visibility and impact of young feminist activism within and across women’s rights movements and other key actors such as donors.
Promoting more effective multigenerational organizing, exploring better ways to work together.
Supporting young feminists to engage in global development processes such as those within the United Nations
Collaboration across all of AWID’s priority areas, including the Forum, to ensure young feminists’ key contributions, perspectives, needs and activism are reflected in debates, policies and programs affecting them.
Diakite s'est activement impliquée dans la défense des femmes dans la vie politique et publique au Mali.
Elle a travaillé pour soutenir la formation des candidates aux élections et s'est élevée contre les mutilations génitales féminines (MGF). Elle était un ardente défenseure de la santé et des droits reproductifs.
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.
LE QUOTA D'EMPLOI TRANS
n'est pas respecté par les entreprises
To claim your power as an expert on the state of resourcing for feminist movements
Perçue comme une figure transformatrice sur les fronts de la lutte pour la libération et pour la liberté, Andaiye a été l’une des premières membres de l’Alliance du peuple travailleur (WPA), un parti socialiste en Guyane de lutte contre le régime autoritaire et participait activement à sa direction. Tout au long de sa vie, Andaiye a placé la justice pour la classe ouvrière et les droits des femmes vivant en milieu rural au centre de son action militante, et s’est battue pour l’élimination des obstacles ethniques entre les femmes indo-guyaniennes et celles afro-guyaniennes.
Andaiye fut l’une des membres fondatrices des Red Thread Women, une organisation de défense pour la juste rémunération du travail en soins réalisé par les femmes, en plus d’avoir travaillé à l’Université des Indes occidentales et avec l’organisation CARICOM. N’hésitant jamais à défier les gouvernements, elle a pointé du doigt les déséquilibres en matière de genre dans les conseils de l’État, les lois discriminatoires à l’égard des travailleur·euse·s du sexe, réclamé le droit à l’avortement en Jamaïque et s’est érigée contre les accords commerciaux, tels que le Marché unique des Caraïbes (CSME) qui permettait la libre circulation des travailleuses domestiques migrantes mais n’octroyait pas ce même droit à leurs enfants.
Elle a publié plusieurs essais universitaires, rédigé des articles d’opinion et révisé les derniers ouvrages de Walter Rodney, l’activiste politique guyanien et coleader du WPA assassiné en 1980. Survivante du cancer, Andaiye a été l’une des fondatrices de la Ligue guyanienne contre le cancer et du Groupe d’action des survivant·e·s du cancer. Elle a également siégé au conseil exécutif de l’Association caribéenne pour la recherche et l’action féministes (CAFRA), dirigé le Help and Shelter et été membre du conseil de la Commission nationale guyanienne pour les femmes. Elle a par ailleurs reçu de nombreux prix, dont le prestigieux Golden Arrow of Achievement (quatrième prix le plus important du Guyana).
Andaiye est décédée le 31 mai 2019, à l’âge de 77 ans. Les nombreux hommages que lui ont rendus des activistes, ami·e·s et celles et ceux que sa vie aura inspiré·e·s ont parlé avec éloquence de son incroyable héritage et de la grandeur de son humanité.
En voici quelques-uns :
“« Andaiye m’a profondément marquée... elle représenttait tellement de choses pour moi : une éducatrice, une combattante, elle m’a appris l’autocritique, à réfléchir plus clairement, elle m’a enseigné la survie, ce qu’est le courage sans limite, la compassion, à dépasser les apparences et traiter les gens comme des gens, sans se laisser impressionner par le statut, la classe, la race... rien de tout ça. » Peggy Antrobus, activiste féministe, auteure, universitaire, La Barbade
« Le genre d’idéalisme confiant que démontrait Andaiye, cette disposition à affronter le monde et une croyance tenace qu’on pouvait vraiment le changer... Cette politique de l’espoir... Comment honorer sa vie, son héritage et sa mémoire autrement qu’en poursuivant le travail éthiquement et en continuant à s’autocritiquer? Et de faire en sorte de placer le travail de soins des femmes au centre. » - Tonya Haynes, La Barbade
« Je peux l’entendre se moquer de notre engouement collectif. Donc, je ris tout en pleurant. Chapeau bas, chère Andaiye, et merci pour tout. Que le voyage de ton esprit soit aimant et lumineux. Passe le bonjour à Walter et aux ancêtres. » - Carol Narcisse, La Jamaïque
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).
While funders committed significantly more money to gender equality over the last decade, still only 1% of philanthropic and development funding has actually been moved to directly resource feminist-led social change.
In solidarity with movements that continue to be invisibilized, marginalized and without access to core, long-term, flexible and trust-based funding, the WITM survey highlights the actual state of resourcing, challenges false solutions, and points to how funding models must change for movements to thrive and meet the complex challenges of our times.
She was part of democratic, anti-war and LGBT movements. In her activism, Yelena was a fierce critic of President Vladimir Putin and his administration, expressing her opposition against Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula and the ill-treatment of prisoners.
Yelena came out as bisexual earlier in 2019.
"Her coming out was a surprise to me, and I didn't approve of it. I told her 'Listen, Lena, you already have a target painted on you because of your political activity. You've just pinned another to your chest."
- Olga Smirnova
Yelena did receive multiple death threats and according to some of her acquaintances, was listed on a homophobic website that called on its visitors to hunt down LGBT persons. She reported the threats to the police, however the Russian state failed to provide protection.
But even in a society where political opposition, as well as members of the LGBT community and advocates for their rights, face continuous and increasing violence, Yelena kept campaigning for social justice and equality.
“She did not miss a single action. And they detained her so often that I already lost count,”
- Olga Smirnova (fellow opposition activist and friend).
Yelena was murdered on 21 July 2019, not far from home. A suspect was arrested but according to some sources, many friends and fellow activists believe that the suspect is a scapegoat and that this was a targeted political killing.
For Yelena’s relatives and friends, her case remains unsolved even though the suspect confessed.
In 2013, Russia passed legislation banning the spreading of what it described as ‘gay propaganda’. In 2014, Human Rights Watch published a report relating to this.
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.
Provide AWID members, movement partners and funders with an updated, powerful, evidence-based, and action-oriented analysis of the resourcing realities of feminist movements and current state of the feminist funding ecosystem.
Identify and demonstrate opportunities to shift more and better funding for feminist organizing, expose false solutions and disrupt trends that make funding miss and/or move against gender justice and intersectional feminist agendas.
Articulate feminist visions, proposals and agendas for resourcing justice.
Magaly Quintana era conocida por muchxs en Nicaragua como 'La Maga'. Fue una historiadora feminista, activista y defensora inquebrantable de los derechos de las mujeres que exigía justicia para las víctimas de femicidio.
Magaly se comprometió a documentar y elaborar estadísticas sobre las mujeres y niñas que fueron asesinadas como resultado de la violencia sexual en el país.
Magaly también criticó al gobierno por la reforma de la Ley 779 que trata la violencia contra las mujeres. Como resultado del arduo trabajo de los movimientos de mujeres nicaragüenses, esta ley, antes de su reforma, incluía importantes disposiciones para penalizar el femicidio. Magaly argumentó que estas reformas legislativas debilitaban la ley, y limitaban la definición de los femicidios a homicidios, invisibilizando, como resultado, los delitos violentos contra las mujeres.
La organización feminista de Magaly se fundó a principios de los ‘80. Fue la directora de Mujeres Católicas por el Derecho a Decidir, que defiende el derecho al aborto terapéutico tras su prohibición en 2006. En 2018, apoyó las protestas contra el gobierno de Daniel Ortega.
Magaly nació en mayo de 1952 y falleció en mayo de 2019.
"Hasta luego, mi querida Magaly Quintana. Muchas gracias, gracias por tu legado. Te veremos de nuevo, tan fuerte y poderosa como siempre."- Erika Guevara Rosas (Directora Americana de Amnistía Internacional).