Tag Archive for: Parity Democracy

,

Parity: that challenge always pending

We demand it in the marches, the partisan companions asked for, it has been promoted for decades with laws and projects and yet not. Again a priority male cabinet. Again a non-representative and non-diverse cabinet.

After speculation, meetings, arrangements and negotiations, finally Alberto Fernández, the president-elect, announced the formation of his cabinet. The Vice Presidency of the Nation, a charge of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, joins the Office of the Chief of Staff, a charge of Santiago Cafiero, the General Secretariat of the Presidency headed by Julio Vitobello, Vilma Ibarra in the Technical and Legal Secretariat (the authorities of the Secretariats have the rank and hierarchy of Minister) Gustavo Beliz in the Secretariat of Strategic Affairs, Martín Guzmán in the Ministry of Economy, Martín Kulfas in the Ministry of Production, Felipe Solá in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Wado de Pedro in the Ministry of the Interior, Daniel Arroyo in the Ministry of Social Development, Eliana Gómez Alcorta in the Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity, Marcela Losardo in the Ministry of Justice, Ginés González García to the Ministry of Health, María Eugenia Bielsa to the Ministry of Territorial Development and Habitat, Gabriel Katopodis to the Ministry of Public Works, Agustín Rossi to the Ministry of Defense, Sabina Frede ric to the Ministry of Security, Claudio Moroni to the Ministry of Labor, Mario Meoni to the Ministry of Transportation, Nicolás Trotta to the Ministry of Education, Tristán Bauer to the Ministry of Culture, Roberto Salvarezza to the Ministry of Science and Technology, Matías Lammens to the Ministry of Sports, Juan Cabandié to the Ministry of Environment and Luis Basterra to the Ministry of Agriculture.

To these Ministries, the state company AYSA and the AFIP and PAMI organizations, headed by Malena Galmarini, Mercedes Marcó del Pont and Luana Volnovich, respectively, are added. In addition, Cecilia Todesca as Deputy Chief of Staff, Adriana Puiggrós as Deputy Minister of Education and Victoria Tolosa Paz in the Social Policy Council.

The photo of the brand new Pink house: Suit, tie, suit, tie, beard, mustache, shirt, handshake. What does that photo tell us that returns so much homogeneity, classism and androcentrism?

D´Alessandro, Vales and Snitcofsky, in an article published in 2017, “Overview of the glass dome in the State” state that: androcentrism?”

“There are more ministers called Juan than female ministers in the history of Argentina. Since 1983, there were only 16 women in this position in different governments, with 154 male ministers who succeeded each other. Nor is there a long history, the first was the first was Susana Ruiz Cerutti in 1989 and lasted only 45 days. Today, women are 31% of the total workers in the positions that make up the organic structure and authorities of the national executive branch, however, there are only 3 women in the 23 front-line positions (ministries, cabinet and chancery); that is, just 13%. In this layer there are also more graduates of the Cardenal Newman school than ministers. ”

This image of the outgoing government ministerial portfolio is a photo that is repeated. Far from parity, once again the political dynamics, relegate women to a few positions.

After the ministerial reorganization, the Cambiemos government left only 2 of the 11 ministries run by women. The new government shows a slight improvement as it increases the number of women in these positions to 5, but still, it is very far from parity: in total, women occupy 21.7% of the 23 positions with ministerial hierarchy of first line (counting the Headquarters of Cabinet).

In the case of the Legislative Power, the permanent struggle of women and dissidents became legal tools. Not without enormous resistance, criticism and violence, in 1991 Argentina sanctioned a Women’s Quota law – law 24.012 – which states that “lists submitted to elections must have women in a minimum of 30% of candidates for office choose and in proportions with the possibility of being elected ”. Today, about 30 years after its implementation, we recognize that the measure was positive. Discussion topics were expanded, key laws were passed and new rights were acquired in matters of identity, family, health and education. In 2017, the Chamber of Deputies of the Nation approved and converted into law the so-called gender parity for the integration of lists of legislative candidates in the national jurisdiction. Thus, as of 2019, the lists should place men and women in an interleaved and consecutive manner, achieving a 50% distribution for each gender. But in the case of the Executive Power, there is no regulation that requires expansion or parity in the formation of cabinets. The participation of trans bodies and dissent in the public-political sphere and in the key decision spaces are still pending challenges.

“In addition to these obstacles, and others where stereotypes and machismo play an important role, there is an underlying prejudice and it is that women do not reach high-level positions because they do not have the necessary education, experience and / or capacity . If we assume that the best or most qualified are always in the government leadership then we should ask ourselves why women are only 10% of the ministers we have had since 1983 to here. Women (…) are more than 40% of workers, have an average year of education more than their peers and are 60% of university students and graduates ”(D´Alessandro, Vales and Snitcofsky, 2017).

According to the UN Women in Politics map, as of January 2019, women have only 20.7% of ministerial positions worldwide, being the highest figure in history. Argentina today, manages to overcome this figure with a government that announces itself progressive, has equity as a priority and addresses specific issues that are fought from feminisms and dissent.

We are more, but there is still much to conquer

Those who militate diversity, rescue what has been achieved and continue fighting for spaces, laws and actions that are still to be achieved. Regarding the presidential cabinet, first, we look at those who access positions of power, questioning how and why they get there. When we see relatively homogeneous and masculine bodies, we only have to ask ourselves whether as a society and from politics we are doing enough to guarantee equal opportunities, more friendly spaces and other more open and inclusive ways of leading. Second, the glass ceilings and walls. Those hermetic power structures, continue to define what roles are assigned to whom based on the generic sex system. Women with some access to education can occupy spaces but only up to a certain point (in this case, be the second of, secretaries, vice-ministers and always advisors), and in certain work areas associated with an extension of care tasks and reproduction: habitat, equality, education or justice, among others.

Now we add a new ministry, the great campaign promise. The Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity. A whole team dedicated to work on these issues, something not less and appropriate to the demands of our times. However, the commitment to equality and equity must be reflected beyond a ministry. It requires a commitment to mainstreaming and not a mere name.

We want diversity to ensure effective representativeness. But the mere existence of women in positions does not guarantee the gender perspective: it is not enough only with the greater presence of female bodies, but with people who are aware and work to reduce the inequalities of power that cross us through issues of gender, sexuality , race, age and class.

The demand for diversity in ministerial positions and the gender perspective at the transversal level is not a whim. It is shown that the greater the diversity, the better decisions are made. We have seen how the gender perspective allows us to be aware of multiple oppressions and build fairer societies. We want to have leadership figures that represent us, who know about our vulnerabilities and build forms of governance that tear down walls and glass ceilings.

In a context where, according to official INDEC figures, women have a lower participation in the labor market (42% against 64% of men), a higher unemployment rate (8.4% against 6.9% of men) and we charge 74% of the salary a man charges for the same task, we will fight until we get a different photo, at the height of our times, at the height of our battles.

Returning to the words of Simone de Beauvoir: “Never forget that a political, economic or religious crisis will suffice for women’s rights to be questioned again. These rights are never taken for granted, you must remain vigilant all your life.”

Authors

Paula Kantor and Emilia Pioletti.

Contact

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

,

Gender parity: a necessary conquest

On November 23, 2017, the National Congress approved Law No. 27,412 on Gender Parity in Areas of Political Representation, the result of the harmonization of several projects presented in the Senate during 2016. The first one was the one presented on February 26 of that year by Peronist deputy Jujeña Liliana Fellner.

“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”.

Although the final draft had been approved in the Senate in October 2016, it did not reach the Chamber of Deputies until shortly before the end of the 2017 session.

In the long session on November 22, Rep. Victoria Donda (Movimiento Libres del Sur) asked that the project be treated “on tables”. Thus, in the early hours of the morning, with 165 votes in favor, 4 votes against, 2 abstentions and 82 absent deputies, the bill became law.

With the aim of guaranteeing gender parity in the legislative bodies, the law establishes that the lists of candidates for the National Congress (deputies and senators) and the Mercosur Parliament must be carried out “placing interspersed women and men from the first titular candidate to the last alternate candidate”.

In this way, the law takes female representation on the electoral lists to 50 percent, guaranteeing the principle of gender equivalent participation. This decision is in tune with the local legislation of some provinces, such as Santiago del Estero, Córdoba, Río Negro and, more recently, Buenos Aires, which for several years now have laws of equivalent gender participation.

The Law of Quota: the fundamental antecedent

Although we had a quota law since 1991, the year in which Argentina became the first country in the world to guarantee the participation of women in electoral posts, this law was already obsolete. Law 24,012, which two decades ago was considered advanced, established a minimum quota of 30% that should be occupied by women. However, in practice, the law ended up showing its limitations when converting that percentage into a ceiling, rather than a minimum quota, causing women to be relegated to third, sixth or ninth place in the lists.

Unfortunately, as we have said on another occasion, in the swing of the interpretation of our National Constitution, and in particular Art. 37, the provisions of the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women continue to be ignored. (CEDAW, for its acronym in English), which enjoys constitutional status and must be mandatorily taken as a current and complementary rule of our Constitution.

 

The CEDAW, in its Art. 4 Inc. 1, provides: “The adoption by States Parties of temporary special measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality between men and women shall not be considered discrimination in the manner defined in the present Convention, but in no way entail, as a consequence, the maintenance of unequal or separate regulations; these measures will cease when the objectives of equality of opportunity and treatment have been reached.”

The female quota laws are nothing other than these “temporary special measures” established in this normative body, which must cease when the objectives of equality of opportunity and treatment have been reached.

Already at the last Conferences on Women in Latin America and the Caribbean, the idea of ​​a minimum percentage for gender parity had been proposed as a regional goal. In the Quito Consensus emerged from the X Regional Conference on Women States recognized that parity is “one of the determinant drivers of democracy, whose goal is to achieve equality in the exercise of power, in decision-making, in the mechanisms of participation and social and political representation, and in the family relations within the different types of families, the social, economic, political and cultural relations, and that constitutes a goal to eradicate the structural exclusion of women“.

 

The quotas are corrective measures and, therefore, temporary; On the other hand, parity is a permanent principle that better represents equality in the exercise of power. Parity is a definitive measure that seeks to share the political power between women and men and transform the very idea of ​​democracy.

However, it is necessary to recognize that the quota laws or quota mechanisms have achieved conquests on the road to equality, favoring new issues on the public agenda, especially in terms of gender equality and defense of rights.

Since then, our Congress has enacted numerous laws that promote the rights of women against discrimination and inequality that they suffer for reasons of gender, such as Law 26,485 of Comprehensive Protection to prevent, punish and eradicate violence against women in the areas of that develop their interpersonal relationships (2009), Law 26,522 of Audiovisual Communication Services (which promotes equal treatment and not stereotyped in the media, avoiding discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation, also in 2009), Law 26,862 of Comprehensive access to medical-assistance procedures and techniques of medically assisted reproduction (2013) and Law 26,873 of Breastfeeding – Public Promotion and Awareness (2013), to name a few.

As a result of the long struggle of the different feminist movements and the work of legislators of different party colors, parity represents an enormous advance in legislative matters. This advance, however, must be accompanied by public policies with a gender perspective that guarantee and deepen the realization of these rights and that contribute to a real transformation of patriarchal power relations.

The Gender Parity Law in Areas of Political Representation is definitely a positive measure that will allow the effective enjoyment of women’s human rights and the real opening of the legislative space to the agenda of the feminist movements as inescapable themes for the strengthening of the democracy.

 

Authors

Rocío Aguirre

Mayca Balaguer

More information

Virginia Pedraza – vir.pedraza@fundeps.org

Mayca Balaguer – maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

Emilia Pioletti – emiliapioletti@fundeps.org