Author: Marisol Caballero

“Well I was and yet I was invisible, that was the fundamental contradiction. I was and yet I was unseen.” Ralph Ellison (1952). This statement eloquently illustrates how femicide persists in the United States today as it has done throughout history. The lack of the term in American society shows how invisible women’s murders are despite their severity and scope. There were 1,604 women killed by men they knew in the US in 2020. In line with the worldwide pattern of femicide, this seems to be happening in the United States too. Despite having a strong feminist presence, the US hasn’t kept up with the rest of the world in terms of putting a name to the problem. Many countries across the world frequently use the terms femicide and feminicide and some have even enacted policies. In contrast, this problem of gendered violence remains nameless and largely ignored in the United States. There seems to be a lack of attention from both the public and private sectors despite the problem’s severity and scope. I want to emphasize that without a label, it’s hard to draw attention to the issue and make it a social issue. There have been a lot of social problems throughout history that are blatant, but when they stay nameless, invisible, and unspoken, little can be done about them. Often, unnamed societal problems go unnoticed for years. Without public attention, the mass media cannot report on it, social movements cannot emerge, and legislators cannot enact laws and legislation. Examples of this occurring in the United States include the discovery of child abuse. It was not until the mid-1960s that laws were enacted to protect children. Before this, they were essentially unprotected under the law since no laws existed protecting them from abusive parents or guardians. Once the label was created, people were able to advocate for laws, and change was pushed forward. Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls movement and Black femicide are current issues that relate to femicide in the US. It is not comparable to the amount of media coverage other movements or news have received, such as the Black Lives Matter movement. Furthermore, both cases involve women who have been killed largely due to their gender. A compelling argument can be made that each of these cases constitutes feminicide, as the US government has failed to adequately intervene to prevent such abuse from occurring. Due to our society’s heavy patriarchy, murders of Black and Indigenous women are directly related to their gender. A lower social status probably influences how the government responds as well. As an example, the Mexican state failed to intervene when many women were murdered in Ciudad Juarez in the 1990s. Many people attribute the government’s failure to act to the fact that they were women and low status. I have aimed to demonstrate how femicide and feminicide remain largely ignored in the United States because there are no labels for them. We might be able to bring more attention to this issue if we embraced the terms. The use of such framing in other countries around the world has been quite successful in bringing about this change by showing that it violates women’s human rights. In the absence of naming the problem, the United States suffers from the phenomenon without gaining sufficient attention. I believe we should look at what other countries who suffer from the same condition have done to encourage recognition and even legislation. The fact that these other countries have adopted laws, such as Mexico, does not mean that the problem has been solved. In no way am I implying that everything has been resolved. However, recognizing that a problem exists, naming it, and creating a law, etc. creates the momentum for meaningful conversations to be held and lasting changes to be implemented. It is a slow and arduous process but worth all of the work.

Ellison, Ralph. (1952) Invisible Man. New York: Random House.

My final paper is centered on the high rates of femicide in Mexico and the feminist mobilizations that have developed in response. It is important to acknowledge how gender inequality is strongly correlated with gender-based violence to grasp the mechanisms that have fostered such conditions.

Throughout history, a number of factors have contributed to the culture of gender-based violence in Mexico. The rape of Indigenous women by Spanish colonizers is often cited as the root of such culture. During La Conquista, Spanish colonizers arrived and created mestizos, people of mixed Indigenous and Spanish descent. In many cases, this was the result of the rape of Indigenous women. Furthermore, European colonization led to sexism through the spread of their values, which were evident in the practice of raping women who they viewed as inferior. Many aspects of Mexican law were based on the French Civil Code. In blatantly sexist terms, the French Civil Code classified women as dependent on men in all areas of their lives. Mexican culture was heavily influenced, and it is from this style of thinking that “machismo” emerged. 

Like toxic masculinity, machismo is an ideology in which men are perceived as superior to women (De la Morena 2020). Segrest, Romero and Domke-Damonte (2003) portray it as, “a patriarchal social system that legitimizes masculinist behavior and reinforces it through cultural values and norms” (p. 16). They state that there are both good and bad elements to machismo such as, “self-respect and responsibility to the family as a provider, as well as negative elements such as affiliate obedience, virginity, consent, fear of authority, and culture rigidity” (p.17). Thus, men are the dominant members of society, displaying very little vulnerability, and taking care of those who are disadvantaged, primarily through the control of women. Men are viewed as being naturally inclined to think independently and act independently. On the contrary, the ideology places women as dependent on men. As a result, women have been traditionally cast into roles subservient to men. They are typically the nurturers, the caregivers, the ones responsible for nurturing their families and taking care of their children. Due to these factors, women have historically played subordinate roles in Mexican society. Thus, “Machismo” has created the conditions for the systematic discrimination of women, which leads to gender inequalities in all aspects of life from education to employment (De la Morena 2020). 

De La Morena, Ines. 2020. “Gender Violence in Mexico: Machismo, Femicides, and Child’s Play.” Harvard International Review 41(3):14-17.

Segrest, Sharon L., Eric J. Romero and Darla Domke-Damonte. 2003. “Exploring the Role of Machismo in Gender Discrimination: A Comparison of Mexico and the U.S.” Equal Opportunities International 22(1):13-31.

Russian performance artist Gena Marvin challenges political and social expectations through her work. She performs in public on the streets of Moscow, often wearing ethereal costumes made of found materials, and wearing striking, alien-like make-up. She defies the Russian authorities by performing in public places. One of Marvin’s performances involves taping the Russian flag colors to her body and walking as part of an anti-police protest demanding the release of Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny. Gena’s actions ultimately led to her expulsion from Moscow College for expressing a negative view of the government. Marvin’s performances, and her very existence as a queer person, are not without risk, including physical violence, threats, and homophobic abuse. But Marvin, who is non-binary, remains defiant and remains committed to her art regardless of the risks she faces. “Whenever I go out in character, I’m on top of the world. No one, even here in Russia, can scare me. I’m like a knight in armor,” she states in her new documentary “Queendom.” 

https://www.cnn.com/style/gena-marvin-queendom-russia-activist/index.html

The overturn of Roe v. Wade had a huge impact on public opinion in France, inspiring fear that abortion rights could be withdrawn at any time. The United States is perceived as a liberal country, similar to France. People were concerned when this occurred in a country like the US, since if it happened there, they feared it could happen in France too. As a result, this awareness prompted people to take action, and nearly one year and a half later, France is on track to enshrine abortion into its constitution. The purpose of these actions is to protect these rights so that if future parliaments were to try and take those rights away it would be extremely difficult to accomplish. While left-wing lawmakers are leading the charge, the bill has generated significant cross-party support. The French government backs it. If they were successful, France would be the first country in the world to grant abortion rights in its constitution. Currently, French law protects abortion rights under a 1975 law. This has been amended numerous times, most recently in 2022, to extend the legal abortion period from 12 to 14 weeks. Parliament could, however, revoke it as it could all laws. However, changing the constitution is much more complicated, requiring either a national referendum or a 3/5th majority in the French Congress. It is therefore argued that constitutionalizing abortion rights would safeguard them even if a pro-life majority were elected.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/02/europe/us-overturn-of-roe-v-wade-prompts-france-to-embed-abortion-rights-in-constitution/index.html

An article released by the Pew Research Center focuses on the gender pay gap in the United States. Essentially, the gender pay gap in the United States has pretty much stayed the same over the past 20 years. In 2022, women earned 82% of what men made, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of full- and part-time workers’ hourly earnings. Those results are about the same as in 2002 when women earned 80% of what men made. The article highlights that in spite of increasing female presence in higher-paying jobs previously dominated by men, women are still overrepresented in lower-paying occupations. Thus, this could partly explain the gender pay gap. Further, the article goes on to mention that there may be other factors contributing to the wage discrepancy that are difficult to measure, such as gender discrimination and gender roles. They stress that there is a difference in pressures for working women and men when it comes to caring for their families. Research shows that having children can reduce women’s earnings and having kids can increase men’s earnings. Interestingly, the Center’s survey found that 25 percent of employed U.S. adults are currently either their boss or the top manager at work. They were able to assess the data and found that a boss or top manager is more likely to be a man than a woman (28% versus 21%).

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/03/01/gender-pay-gap-facts/

In an article published on September 1, 2023, UN News sheds light on worrying developments regarding the new draft law in Iran. This law imposes new punishments on women and girls who don’t wear the headscarf in public. A group of UN Human Rights Council-appointed experts expressed deep concern about this draft law. They hold that this draft law could be viewed as a form of gender apartheid, as authorities seem to govern through discrimination designed to suppress women and girls. Added to the existing laws, they say they could amount to gender persecution. Among the main concerns of the experts is that it imposes harsh punishments for non-compliance, which could lead to violence. They added that it violates fundamental rights such as the right to participate in culture, the right to freedom of expression, the right to peaceful protest, and the right to social, educational, and health services. These developments come after months of protests over Jina Mahsa Amini’s death and restrictive veiling laws. The 22-year-old was arrested in Tehran by the morality police for allegedly not complying with hijab laws. Her death is reported to have resulted from being severely beaten at a police station. Despite reports that she had been assaulted, Iranian authorities denied it. Furthermore, the Human Rights Council experts warn that women who are economically marginalized will suffer disproportionately from the new punishments. Also, managers and directors of organizations who fail to enforce the law can also face punishment.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/09/1140307

Frias (2023) first gives an overview of how the term “femicide” came to be. Often, in Mexico, the terms femicide and feminicide are used to refer to gender-based violence against women. Diana H. Russell coined the term femicide at the first International Tribunal on Crimes against Women in 1976 to describe the murder of women by men due to their gender. The term already existed, but Russell gave it a political connotation and used it to describe feminist politics. In the course of its development, the term has come to mean both the killing of women by men because they are women as well as the killing of women simply because they are women. The purpose of this was to capture the possibility that gender-based killings may extend beyond male perpetrators, women may be capable of killing women as well. In 2006 Lagarde adopted the term femicide but added a twist, she coined the term “feminicide” or in Spanish “feminicidio” This term was similar to femicide but different in that it added on to Russel’s definition so that it included the dimension where it addressed the state’s role in neglecting cases and the impunity for these crimes.

Feminicidal violence is the extreme, the culmination of many forms of gender violence against women that represent an attack on their human rights and that lead them to various forms of violent death. In many cases, these forms of gender violence are tolerated by society and the State; at other times, citizens live feminicidal violence with powerlessness, for there are few channels available for the enforcement of rights.

Lagarde

As Frias points out, quantitative methods fail to reveal the full extent of feminicide because not all feminicides are labeled as such, and not all female murders are feminicides. Moreover, she argues that female homicides and feminicides are two different phenomena, and it is difficult to distinguish between the two based on the available records. There is a scarcity of details in death records like perpetrator and victim characteristics, making it difficult to identify femicide adequately. Among the challenges Frias points out in feminicide research is that it fails to consider that the “female” category is not the only important feature and that other factors, such as age and race/ethnicity, may further marginalize females. To illustrate her point, she uses the example of indigenous women, who are more likely to experience gender-based violence like partner violence or sexual violence in their childhood than non-indigenous women. She draws attention to the fact that official statistics and administrative records fail to separate homicide and feminicide information by race or ethnicity. Moreover, she points out that indigenous communities are marginalized because they are usually far from large cities, where law enforcement resources such as feminicide specialized state attorneys are located. A lack of medical services, which would be useful in identifying feminicide cases, is another problem. She argues that this largely contributes to the invisibility of indigenous women’s feminicide. Moreover, this study by Frias aims to accomplish three objectives: (one) differentiate female homicides that occurred between 2001-2017 as feminicides or not feminicides, (second) examine the relationship between gender inequality, feminicide, and female homicides in Mexico, (third) assess feminicides and female homicide trends in indigenous and non-indigenous municipalities and to analyze how homicides differ from feminicides according to victims’ sociodemographic characteristics and the means by which the crimes are committed.

Frías, Sonia M. 2023. “Femicide and Feminicide in Mexico: Patterns and Trends in Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Regions.” Feminist Criminology 18(1): 3–23.

The word ‘capitalism’ conjures up both good and bad images for us. We think about economic freedom, efficient production, and economic growth. A few negative aspects of capitalism that come to mind are its role in supporting major income gaps, causing class conflict, and fostering social inequalities. Or at least these are the things that come to my mind when I think about capitalism. My point is that capitalism is famous for contributing to these effects. However, one of its lesser-known effects is the way capitalism supports patriarchal norms. Considering women are often invisible in patriarchal capitalism, it’s unsurprising that this major aspect of capitalism is ignored. We live in a capitalist-driven patriarchal society, but how often do we stop and consider what that really means and the impact it has on the lives of women?

Recently, a friend of mine found out she was having a baby girl. She was a bit disappointed because she was hoping for a boy. Her sentiment was inspired by the fact that she thought men’s lives were more hopeful, with a wider range of opportunities available to them. She explained that she didn’t hold any notions of boys being better than girls, just that this is a man’s world, and she wants her children’s lives to be easier than her own. After being raised by a single mom and becoming a single mom of two girls herself, she has a unique perspective on the difficulties women face in our society. 

Even though feminists and women have made progress, the job is not done yet. Women are more likely to face domestic violence, and their jobs are frequently underpaid, among many more issues. Women and men are not equal and gender equality will not be achieved until the relationship between capitalism and patriarchy is severed. The system that oppresses women must be broken to begin fixing all that is wrong. Capitalism reinforces patriarchal norms by propagating ideas of what jobs are adequate for women. The result is the sexual division of labor, women get low-paying jobs and do jobs that are deemed appropriate to them. Women are often labeled nurturers, so they are cast into jobs like social workers, teachers, healthcare workers, homemakers, etc. The problem lies in that these jobs despite their importance are undervalued because they are largely done by women. Why is that often the case? Because capitalism and patriarchy establish a hierarchy and assign women to the bottom. That is why even important jobs are paid little if they are jobs done primarily by women.

Considering women are often invisible in patriarchal capitalism, it’s not surprising that this major aspect of capitalism is ignored. A close relationship has always existed between capitalism and patriarchy. Consequently, women’s work has been undervalued and largely invisible; thus, contributing to their oppression. This brings us to ask ourselves, what should we or can we do? Why should anyone care? If you are a woman, a mother, grandmother, father, grandfather, a family member, friend, etc. This issue touches the lives of everyone. It is our job as members of our society to bring light to women’s systemic oppression. If we continue to overlook the problem, it will only continue to thrive and women will continue to pay the consequences. Making the world a better place for future generations is a goal we should all work towards. Bringing attention to these large issues is a large component of creating social change and bettering women’s lives everywhere.

For this week’s weekly post, I selected an article that discusses how a federal judge in Tulsa refused to block an Oklahoma law that makes providing gender-affirming health care to young transgender people a felony offense. As a result of the new law, medical treatments, such as puberty-blocking drugs and hormones, will no longer be available for people under the age of 18 in Oklahoma. The law was passed by Oklahoma’s Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Gov. Kevin Stitt in May. Until recently, enforcement of the law was on hold. For minors already receiving cross-sex hormones or puberty-blocking drugs, this law allows a six-month transition period. Those six months are nearly over, and the deadline is early next month. For young transgender people and their families, the judge’s decision was devastating, as it offered some hope of stopping the law from taking hold. There has been some opposition to the law’s enforcement, as it faces a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Oklahoma, Lambda Legal, and Jenner & Block LLP. In addition to Oklahoma, at least 22 other states have passed similar laws that prohibit or restrict gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors and they face similar lawsuits. One example of a similar situation is Arkansas. Arkansas was the first state to ban gender-affirming medical care for minors. However, Arkansas’ ban was declared unconstitutional by a federal judge in June. This was the first ruling to overturn a ban related to these issues.

After reading this article, it bothered me to see how children’s rights are taken away in this day and age. Last semester I wrote a paper on children’s rights on a global scale, and I didn’t mention this topic because it didn’t occur to me at the time. However, one could argue that denying children access to gender-affirming healthcare is an infringement on their rights. Children’s rights continue to be a pressing global issue everywhere, not just in third-world countries or the global south. In the past, children’s rights have not been protected, which is not surprising given their vulnerable status and lack of agency as they do not have the ability to advocate for themselves. It is very troubling to see the way things are heading and the impact such laws will have on the lives of many people who are already often marginalized.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/oklahoma/articles/2023-10-06/federal-judge-in-oklahoma-clears-the-way-for-a-ban-on-medical-care-for-transgender-young-people

Maria Jose Ventura discusses throughout her article how Women’s collective action in Mexico has gained greater media exposure since 2016, specifically focusing on the rise in violence against women and femicide across Mexican states. Alfaro points out that Mexican Women’s Collective Action has been influenced by the women’s movements across Latin America and the US. Specifically, she mentions the impact of movements in Argentina, Chile, and the US. #metoo mobilizations in the US in 2019 struck deeply in the minds of young Mexican women. It led to hundreds of thousands of women reporting sexual harassment, domestic violence, rape, kidnapping, and trafficking cases. In her article, she examines Mexican women’s collective action via a prefiguration framework, based on feminist and new social movement literature. To analyze the cultural outcomes of women’s movements, she engages Icaza’s (2019) body-mind-spirit framework and Ahmed’s (2004) cultural politics of emotion. She argues that we can better understand the complex emotions inside women’s movements if we look at emotions as cultural practices, rather than psychological states. Similarly, she asserts that through the body-mind-spirit framework, direct action can be analyzed in a way that breaks down the body/mind distinction, instead understanding the body as the primary territory of healing, reimagining, and rebuilding. Her argument is that indigenous and grassroots feminists possess radical emancipatory power, which can eventually result in radical change. Women’s collectives build alternatives to the present, not by adopting new policies or reforming the system. Instead, they rebuild social dynamics within communities to break down hegemonic violence. By analyzing the Mexican feminist movement, she argues that Women’s Collective Action in Mexico is part of a new wave of hope movements creating alternate, anti-patriarchal worlds. She notes that rather than an organized front with a list of political goals, this movement lives by the desire to create a new world.

Ventura Alfaro, M. J. (2022). Women’s movements against VAW and feminicide: How community-based feminisms build worlds otherwise from the periphery of mexico city. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 15(1), 240-256. doi:https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v15i1p240