Tag Archive for: INADI

In August, during the election campaign, newspaper profile published a note assaulting Ofelia Fernandez. From Fundeps we denounced to INAM and INADI but their responses were lukewarm and insufficient in the case of INAM and restrictive in the case of INADI.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

On July 27, Diario profile published a note entitled “Operation cancel” in which it intended to make a brief analysis of the link between social networks, new technologies and political participation.
With this objective, the author of the note, Pola Oloixarac, took as a reference figure the candidate for legislator by the City of Buenos Aires, Ofelia Fernández, making the following statement:

“In cyclic olitas, as things and people circulate on the web, we learn that certain characteristics of the Argentine bourgeoisie have an unwanted effect on the vagina of the candidate for legislator Ofelia Fernández. In a video where she is seen talking from a pulpit, she says that “the warmth of the bourgeoisie dries my shell.” Ophelia revitalizes the Marxist troop of the class struggle by bringing it closer to the immediacy of her bombshell: she invites us to think that there is an unsatisfied sexual drive in the status quo, and that the heat of the coming revolution is the only thing that could excite the young woman Ophelia According to that image, voting for Ophelia is an invitation to please her sexually, preparing her for a successful intercourse. At 19, Ofelia understands that the personal is political, that is, that the political is genital: that the Pindongas and cuchuflitos of each unite are somehow called to participate in the collective hysteria of the revolution (or the Change).”

In the cited paragraph, the author takes the metaphorical expression used by Ophelia to communicate her disagreement and rejection of certain political practices and makes a literal interpretation with the clear objective of running the debate from the political to the sexual level, degrading her for her status as a woman .

It is important to mention that it is not the first time that the newspaper profile exercises media and symbolic violence against Ofelia Fernández. On November 21, 2018, this same publisher published a note entitled “The schoolgirl k that impacted the G20 counter-summit”. The recidivism of this type of action realizes the urgent need for State agencies responsible for eradicating gender violence to carry out the necessary interventions to achieve this goal.

Faced with the violence of these speeches, from Fundeps we present the corresponding complaint to INAM and INADI through their web pages. Although the first agency received the complaint, INADI contacted by telephone to inform us that the option to make complaints by that means is no longer available and that they must be submitted in one of its offices. We understand that the restriction of the channels to make claims means a restriction on the rights of the hearings, limited to those who have knowledge about this administrative route, the time and resources to do so.

For its part, INAM’s response comes after two months of having filed the complaint; the Institution acknowledges that there was misogyny in the story, but that the author of the note did nothing more than give a literary or philosophical interpretation to Fernández’s sayings, thus minimizing the symbolic, political and media violence to which she went submitted the candidate. The document sent by the institution states:

“Although, mention is made of the genitals of the then candidate, and that should not be part of a political analysis, the note takes up textual phrases from the political leader and the article seems to become an elaborate analysis of those phrases, with some fragments of a rather literary or philosophical tone that include other figures of politics and / or culture. We understand, however, that there was misogynist production in a series of articles or journalistic coverage based on this candidate, although not only, but also other women in politics. ”

The last paragraph cited recognizes the misogyny from which the journalistic approaches to the group “women in politics” are made. However, instead of aggravating and sustaining the claim presented, the paper underestimates these misogynistic violence by falling into a collective.

It is clear that the newspaper profile profile reaffirms and reproduces the political violence faced by women who choose to perform within party politics, and accounts for delegitimization strategies through the reification and sexualization of their bodies. A deal that, on the contrary, is never applied to their male peers.

This type of action delegitimates and disables the political participation of women, as well as undermines the effectiveness of the recently implemented Law of Gender Parity, interfering with the possibility of performance on equal terms as men. This attack on Ofelia Fernández constitutes an attack on all women and a disciplinary and expulsive message from the political arena.

From the above, it is evident that we are facing a case of media and symbolic violence as stipulated by Law 26,485 on the Integral Protection of Women. This regulation defines media violence as follows:

“… That publication or dissemination of messages and stereotyped images through any mass media, that directly or indirectly promotes the exploitation of women or their images, injures, defames, discriminates, dishonors, humiliates or attempts against the dignity of women, as well as the use of women, adolescents and girls in pornographic messages and images, legitimizing inequality of treatment or constructing sociocultural patterns that reproduce inequality or generate violence against women”.

Symbolic violence, on the other hand, is defined as one that “through stereotyped patterns, messages, values, icons or signs transmits and reproduces domination, inequality and discrimination in social relations, naturalizing the subordination of women in society»

The aforementioned note also constitutes a violation of subsection m. Article 3 of Law 26,522 on Audiovisual Communication Services, which establishes the obligation to “promote the protection and safeguarding of equality between men and women, and the plural, egalitarian and non-stereotyped treatment, avoiding all discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation. ”

This content, besides constituting an act of violence in itself, functions as a legitimator and a motivator of other expressions of violence. Ofelia Fernández shared the misogynist and macho messages she received in her networks from this publication and declared “It hurts the electoral campaign a lot to enable us to be treated like this. Unfair and unpleasant. ”

Author

Mila Francovich

Contact

Cecilia Bustos Moreschi, cecilia.bustos.moreschi@fundeps.org

As part of our work monitoring public policies regulating the media, we identify situations of media and symbolic violence and carry out the corresponding complaints. On this occasion, it was about the broadcasts of two television programs: on the one hand, “Los angeles de la mañana” on Canal 13 and, on the other, “Animales sueltos” on América TV.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

What happened in “Los angeles de la mañana”?

In the program broadcast on May 14, “Los Angeles de la mañana” (a magazine directed by Ángel De Brito) made a “change of look” to Cinthia Fernández, which consisted of a haircut. During the same, Cinthia said repeatedly that he did not want to be cut, but gave in to the insistent pressure from his colleagues. In this situation, he mentioned that he did not want to be cut too much, and that he wanted to see how far they cut it, setting the limits for the intervention. Its manifestations were reduced with comments like “it is not elegant what you have”, “do not be silly, hair grows”, “you do not have to see it”, “they brought you here to be better”.

During the haircut Cinthia was seen nervous, scared, pressed and uncomfortable with the situation. The driver and the panelists were all the time commenting about their appearance in a demeaning way and without letting it intervene. “I want to cry, I’m serious,” “I’m having a hard time,” he said, about the end.

We are concerned that television exposes such a violent situation, especially the exercise of acts on the body of women without their consent. It is clear that she consented to agree to the change of look, but this was not carried out under her terms, but was systematically pressed and all her comments and expressions of desire were minimized.

What happened in “Animals loose”?

On May 16, in the program broadcast by America, media and symbolic violence was again committed. Towards the end of the program, Alejandro Fantino asked the panelist Romina Manguel: “But stop, that’s how you came?”, Referring to his clothes. The driver, ignoring the discomfort of the journalist, continued saying: “Focus on Manguel”, asking him to show his clothes and parade.

Manguel’s reaction was a nervous laugh and ask him to stop. The driver continued, insisting that the cameras focus on her and insinuating that she could find a partner. All this intervention, although brief and only at the end of the program, was extremely violent for Romina and stereotyped for women. This was accompanied by the complicity and laughter of the rest of the panel made up of men, who did nothing to stop these moments of uncomfortable reification of the only female panelist of the program.

Why are we talking about media violence and what laws protect our complaints?

Both media contents are humiliating and discriminatory, and constitute cases of mediatic and symbolic violence. Recall that the Law of Comprehensive Protection for Women 26.485 defines media violence as “that publication or dissemination of stereotyped messages and images through any mass media, that directly or indirectly promotes the exploitation of women or their images , injure, defame, discriminate, dishonor, humiliate or threaten the dignity of women, as well as the use of women, adolescents and girls in pornographic messages and images, legitimizing inequality of treatment or construct sociocultural patterns that reproduce inequality or generators of violence against women “. In this sense, according to articles 70 and 71 of the Audiovisual Communication Services Law 26,522 all media outlets are obliged to comply with 26.485 in addition to “avoiding content that promotes or incites discriminatory treatment based on race, color, sex, sexual orientation, language, religion, political or other opinions, national or social origin, economic status, birth, physical appearance, the presence of disabilities or that undermine human dignity or induce to behaviors that are harmful to the environment or to the health of people and the integrity of children or adolescents “.

What organisms do we denounce and what for?

Attentive to this normative framework, as well as to the great responsibility -particularly in Argentine society- of the media to construct meaning and form an opinion, we have denounced these situations in front of the Ombudsman’s Office, the INADI radio and television Observatory and the Observatory of symbolic and media violence of the INAM. We hope that these agencies take the necessary actions in this regard and we commit ourselves to continue ensuring the effective execution of existing public policies, as well as promoting those that still need to be created to fight against this and all types of gender violence.

More info:

Denunciamos a Eduardo Feinamm por sus dichos homo-odiantes sobre Facundo Nazareno Saxe

Denunciamos a TN por violencia mediática y simbólica

Denuncia al programa Animales Sueltos por tratamiento discriminatorio de la información

El Show de la Mañana otra vez incurrió en violencia mediática

Author:

Mariana Barrios Glanzmann

Contact:

Cecilia Bustos Moreschi, cecilia.bustos.moreschi@fundeps.org

In the framework of our work of monitoring public policies regulating the media, we identified and denounced two situations of media and symbolic violence that were exposed in two programs of the Todo Noticias channel last week.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The first situation occurred on May 2, when in a report issued a story is exposed about a woman (former police officer), named Johana, who was stealing cars using a drone. The second one is presented the following day in the newscast of the half day also, in a news about a former employee of the Municipality of La Plata who was dismissed from her job and considers that the dismissal was unjustified. Beyond the specific stories that are exposed in each of the news, we find in common a violent approach as the news is illustrated with photos of women in underwear or swimsuits, exposing a hypersexualization of the protagonists through the display of their bodies. This representation is stereotyped and diverts attention from what is being reported in the news, which has to do with the commission of a crime in the first case, and a labor claim in the other. Illustrating both situations with these images delegitimizes the women in these stories and inflicts media and symbolic violence on them and also on other women who may be in the same situation. That is why from Fundeps we proceeded with the corresponding complaints, which were filed with the Public Defender’s Office, the Radio and Television Observatory of INADI and the National Institute for Women. In a context of social transformation, driven fundamentally by the struggle of the feminist movement, it is inadmissible to tolerate expressions that contain discriminatory gender stereotypes, which fuel the perpetuation of a macho culture that permanently violates the freedom and the body of women. Understanding the role of the media in the reproduction of symbolic violence is that, in addition to executing the corresponding complaints, we urgently see the need to create spaces for training and training of workers of the mass media. communication regarding the gender perspective, considering that it is the only way to guarantee the production and the approach of respectful contents that contribute to the construction of a equality society.

By virtue of Eduardo Feinmann’s homo-hateful expressions about the person, life and work of a CONICET researcher, from the Fundeps Gender and Sexual Diversity Team we decided to report this case to the Public Defender’s Office and the National Institute against Discrimination , Xenophobia and Racism (INADI).

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

On Thursday, April 11, during the broadcast of his television program on the national air channel A24, journalist Eduardo Feinmann violently exposed a speech by Facundo Nazareno Saxe, researcher at the National Council of Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET) and the Research Institute in Humanities and Social Sciences of the National University of La Plata. Taking as a reference the paper ‘Queer memory and anal cartoon: when the comic opens our asses (and we like it)’, Eduardo Feinmann said “It impresses me. A shame. These are the researchers who then complain ?, “Create something called ‘ñoquicet.” The contemptuous tone that the journalist used to denigrate the researcher’s work around the queer perspective and respect for diversity, as well as his sexual orientation, showed in himself the marked homo-hateful look that he reproduced through a massive medium Communication.

Not only did he present the researcher Saxe’s speech in a violent way, but he also exposed it, sharing his personal data and social networks, which allowed some people to access and reproduce a series of messages full of hatred and threats towards him. his way of being and thinking.

This finding made by the driver and journalist was not casual either, since it was carried out in a context in which the cuts made by the National Government to CONICET and the crisis that science was going through in our country were news. In this way he made a homo-hateful political use, taking the image of Facundo Nazareno Saxe and his investigations to criticize CONICET and in this way justify the budget reduction and lack of policies regarding it.

Making and using this type of homo-hate messages is not only violence and discrimination, but also in a context in which there is a great reaction against all the advances of conquered rights such as the Law of Equal Marriage and the Law of Identity of Gender, is extremely harmful because of the hatred it generates and endorses.

It is important to remember that, according to the report of the Argentina LGBT Federation, in 2017 alone there were 103 assaults, murders or acts of physical violence motivated by an act of discrimination based on sexual orientation, expression or gender identity. Added to this, we must consider that the Trans population of the Argentine Republic has an average life expectancy of about 32 years and that we still do not even have trans labor quota laws (except in the province of Buenos Aires) to be able to guarantee minimally basic rights that have historically been denied to them.

For all these reasons, we consider that this was a clear case of media and symbolic violence in accordance with the definitions of Law 26,522 on Audiovisual Communication Services, which in its Article 70 establishes that “the programming of services provided by law must avoid content that promote or incite discriminatory treatment based on race, color, sex, sexual orientation … or that undermine human dignity … ”

We understand that the media have an undeniable responsibility in the construction of citizenship, since they are not only opinion makers, but also endorse and legitimize practices of society.
The symbolic violence expressed through the media promotes its reproduction and bases other forms of gender violence, so we reject the statements of Feinmann, insist on the need to train journalists in gender perspective and in the treatment of this case on the part of the competent bodies.

Author

Valentina Montero

Contact

Cescilia Bustos Moreschi, cecilia.bustos.moreschi@fundeps.org