editorial

We did not anticipate that when the Cairo and Beijing agendas1 reached fruition, we would see a resurgence of religious extremism at national, regional, and global levels and across borders. The onslaught has meant that many of the rights we thought would be achieved and concretised for women and girls are under renewed threat. The assault on rights has been intense, and, though commonly referred to as religious fundamentalism, is intertwined with other political trends which can be best described as ethno-religious nationalism.

These three terms—nationalism, ethnicity, and religion—are by and large, powerful political and patriarchal concepts. It is useful for us to define these terms to fully understand what the phenomena represents. Nationalism is a concept which is based on communal identification with the nation, and based on this identification espouses sovereignty, self-determination, and self-governance. Ethnicity refers to an identity, usually inherited, based on a shared descent, culture, language, and customs. Ethno-nationalism is a form of nationalism based on ethnicity—and taken to the most extreme—that citizenship in a state should be limited to one ethnic or cultural group. Religion encompasses beliefs, rituals, texts, and worldviews about the transcendental, and are used as identity differentiators. Ethnicity is often connoted with a common religion, and religious nationalism is when religion is a defining contributor to the national identity, along with ethnicity, language, and culture. Ethno-religious nationalism is then a beast, which is fuelled by both ethnic and religious identity, and which reinforces that the political legitimacy of the state is primarily derived from adherence to religious doctrines. Ethno-religious nationalism seeks to fuse the state, geographical territory, culture, and religious text, and impose and define it through bodies.

Ethno-religious nationalism seeks to fuse the state, geographical territory, culture, and religious text, and impose and define it through bodies... This is what makes the current political environment so challenging for those of us working on women’s rights, sexual and reproductive rights, and with human rights frameworks. It is like battling the Hydra, when having chopped off one head, two emerge in its place.

This is what makes the current political environment so challenging for those of us working on women’s rights, sexual and reproductive rights, and with human rights frameworks. It is like battling the Hydra, when having chopped off one head, two emerge in its place. However, for us to fight this beast, we must first understand it, and the conditions that have produced it. In the past, countries professed secular democracy as the way ahead, but, today, nations are adopting national religions in order to propel themselves in the 21st century—hence, a Buddhist Sri Lanka, a Christian America, a Hindu India, and a Muslim Turkey. In a number of countries, the national religion is affiliated, most often, with a dominant (majority) racial or ethnic group. The strident call of these groups is a return to majoritarian,2 patriarchal politics guised under democracy. Equality of women, of citizens who belong to ethnic and religious minorities, and of sexual minorities, and acceptance of diversity are all singled out as threats to the majority. Interestingly, this phenomenon is apparent across continents, races, and religions.

Though religion is a crucial part of the phenomenon, it is not the only part. Rising poverty, deep inequalities and inequities, lack of access to opportunities and resources, poor governance, and low levels of education are the grounds that give birth to ethno-nationalist discourse. The arguments used are simplistic. The first is the easy identification of ‘the other’ as the one who takes away resources and opportunities and causes poverty and inequality. The second is that pluralism and liberalism are ideologies which grant equal rights to ‘the other,’ and empower ‘the other’ over the majority. The third is that a strong state with majoritarian politics, based on religious values, will govern well and distribute resources and opportunities more equitably amongst the majority. The last, of course, is that those who profess liberalism and pluralism (most often, feminists and LGBTIQ activists) stand in the way of this religious, majoritarian, ethno-nationalist state and its success. As such, they are considered the enemy of the state. They also become ‘the other.’ The ‘othering’ spills over to different groups over different issues. These simplistic arguments are appealing, easily absorbed, and regurgitated. However, the ethno-national religious framework provides no solutions to rising poverty, inequality, and instability both nationally and globally. Neither does it challenge economic policies—specifically neoliberal economic ones, such as privatisation, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, and reduction in the role of government in providing social welfare services—which continue deepening poverty, inequalities, and inequities.

...the ethno-national religious framework provides no solutions to rising poverty, inequality, and instability both nationally and globally. Neither does it challenge economic policies—specifically neo-liberal economic ones, such as privatisation, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, and reduction in the role of government in providing social welfare services—which continue deepening poverty, inequalities, and inequities.

Debates on countering the limitations placed on women’s rights, especially our sexual and reproductive rights, on the basis of religion come from two perspectives. One is to work within the framework of religion, and promote fairer, less discriminatory interpretations, which facilitate rights, and vice-versa. Indeed, some partners and faith-based organisations have found success with such strategies. In Maldives, ARROW’s partner Society for Health Education (SHE)³ worked with progressive religious scholars in order to pass a fatwa⁴ which makes abortion available. These scholars quoted verses from the hadith,⁵ which supported circumstances where abortion was permissible. They also were able to quote verses, which were progressive on different fronts: against intimate partner violence and marital rape, and were pro-contraception. This was strategic and successful, especially in the case of Maldives where by and large there was a homogenous understanding of Islam.

Much of the work on providing access to contraception and family-planning in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia and Pakistan, utilises similar strategies of progressive interpretations, which help build the case for birth spacing. This has also worked in countries like Senegal, with the issue of female genital mutilation.

The second perspective is to work within a secular framework, which recognises and promotes equality of women. In Morocco, our partner, the Association Marocaine de Planification Familiale (AMPF) also worked on access to safe abortion.6 Interestingly enough, the Malliki school, whose interpretations are considered the strictest and most rigid, and which expressly forbids abortion, is the leading school of Islamic thought in Morocco. However, the partner and stakeholders were able to use social welfare arguments in order to enable access to safe abortion. The stakeholders were able to revise the existing law to allow for abortion in the case of rape, incest, and foetal malformation. This strategy was successful in Morocco, which is a constitutional monarchy wherein the social welfare arguments appealed to and convinced the progressive King, and, by and large, still remains largely secular.

Working within the secular framework allows activists and advocates to advance concepts of women’s bodily autonomy, bodily integrity, rights, and choice. Working within religious frameworks does place some limitations. For example, religious leaders do not universally endorse ‘limiting’ births when promoting access to contraception and family-planning, providing access to contraception and comprehensive sexuality education for unmarried, young people, in ending child, early, and forced marriages, as well as non-discrimination for persons of diverse sexual orientation and gender identities and expressions. This despite the existence of liberal interpretations across all religions to support these issues.

The question then remains, why are liberal interpretations not used more often and accepted more widely? This is primarily because religious interpretation does not occur in a vacuum, and in consultation with books and scholars alone. There are five underlying challenges to mainstreaming progressive religious interpretations.

The first challenge is that in a number of countries, there is a strong, ethno-nationalist discourse, which provides the context for the religious interpretation. In Sri Lanka, the Women and Media Collective’s research⁷ shows that the last political regime of Rajapakshe was strongly affiliated with the rise of the Bodhu Bolu Sena (BBS), a right-wing group led by Buddhist monks. The BBS discourse on contraception and family-planning was based on majoritarian politics and how international organisations, such as Marie Stopes International and PSI, had the agenda of making Sinhalese women infertile and thus reducing the Sinhala Buddhist population. At the same time, in order to preserve Sri Lanka as a Buddhist country, there was also discourse that emerged on controlling the Muslim population, by limiting to two children per couple. This premise of majoritarian politics and perpetuating a majority race hinders progressive views from emerging and finding acceptance within society.

The second challenge for progressive interpretations to find root is that in a number of countries, religion is used as a source of identity politics. The research in India by the Rural Women’s Social Education Centre⁸ brings up stories of how mixed marriages (marriages between people of different religions) were discouraged and prohibited, sometimes with great pressure, even violence, and were especially exerted on the women. In Myanmar, the government also passed a law prohibiting mixed marriages,⁹ and in Malaysia, in order to marry a Muslim, one has to convert to Islam.¹⁰ In these cases, autonomy to choose one’s partner falls prey to the idea of a homogeneous identity for the individual, the family, and the community. Mixed marriages are prohibited, discouraged, or penalised in the ethno-religious state because they threaten the traditional family—which is the key site of social reproduction and primary socialisation.

The third challenge is that rigid, limiting interpretations pertaining to sexual and reproductive rights are strongest in the context of poverty. The research from Bangladesh,11 Indonesia,¹² and Pakistan¹³ show that the poor, rural, lesser educated communities were located further away from the locus of power and development, and had less access to economic, educational, health, and social resources. In these power-and-resource-scarce settings, the communities were very often under the control of community leaders, including religious leaders and dominant men. These community leaders used both gender and religion in order to impose rather than disrupt social hierarchies. Because these communities had less access to both education, transport, and technology, the availability of progressive interpretations, and a broader social system which supported different progressive interpretations did not exist. In these cases, programmes which worked with religious leaders tend to reinforce gender power imbalances rather than to empower women to make decisions about their bodies and their health.

... rigid, limiting interpretations pertaining to sexual and reproductive rights are strongest in the context of poverty. The research from Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Pakistan show that the poor, rural, lesser educated communities were located further away from the locus of power and development, and had less access to economic, educational, health, and social resources.

The fourth challenge was the rapid export of extremist interpretations across borders, fuelled by specific religious groups. In Islam,

it was the emergence of strong Wahhabi/Salafi schools of thought that posed as the ideal interpretation of Islam with their extreme limitations on women’s roles and women’s rights. In Christianity, it was the export of American Evangelical churches professing an anti-contraception, anti-abortion, and anti-gay agenda.¹⁴ The conscious exporting of religious beliefs, along with ‘social welfare’ aid across countries, undermined the natural ability of societies to create laws and religious interpretations freely, and which was reflective of their own cultures and their own lived realities.¹⁵ Those who exported these religious interpretations sought to oust secular, human rights, and women’s rights frameworks as a threat to enabling adherence to the true faith.

The last challenge is that religion has become institutionalised in many countries. There are not only churches, mosques, and temples with priests, ustaz/ustads, and monks and texts; there are religious bodies, religious schools, religious health services, religious authorities, and religious courts, which embody, implement, and carry out actions based on these interpretations. There is an entire social,¹⁶ economic,¹⁷ and legal¹⁸ system premised on religion, which espouses separation, purity, ritual, and fundamentalism, and which creates the necessity to work on institutional reform and not only enabling ‘progressive’ interpretations. Through the years, rights-based activists within the Lutheran churches have been able to move forward and endorse sexual and reproductive rights as institutions rather than as individual religious leaders.

The work of creating and promoting progressive interpretations with religious leaders must go hand-in hand with strengthening and reinforcing the bodily autonomy and integrity and rights of women.

While championing freedom of religion, we need to equally champion freedom from religion. There needs be equal investment especially in young democracies, of strengthening democratic institutions, which are able to check the power and influence of religious institutions and provide redressal when rights are violated or trespassed.

voices from the global south

RECONFIGURING CULTURE AND RELIGION FOR WOMEN’S HUMAN RIGHTS:

I have argued for the need for a paradigm shift from viewing culture as an obstacle to women’s rights to demanding cultural rights for women on a basis of equality with men. After discussions and interactions with the CEDAW Committee, I decided to write my 2012 report which was submitted to the UN General Assembly, The Enjoyment of Cultural Rights by Women on an Equal Basis with Men.1

The report does not take up the issue of SRHR specifically, but argues for the need to challenge presumptions about “cultural norms” and to ensure that women move from the margins to the centre of decision-making on all aspects of their lives, including determining what is cultural heritage, its interpretation, and decisions on what is to be kept, modified, or entirely discarded. I have also maintained that no cultural practices are in keeping with Human Rights norms and standards; all cultures have to move towards Human Rights. Conscious of the stranglehold that “culture” often imposes on women’s agency, in my very first statement, I said that the right to participate in cultural life includes the right not to participate in any ritual or practice that undermines human dignity.

Fundamentalist movements have a tendency to focus on the family and family norms, in particular sexuality and reproduction, to promote their control over society. Women and men who assume the norms of fundamentalism become markers of the territory appropriated by these forces. We have sadly witnessed this in Pakistan, including to extremes.

“Far more context-specific evidence-based analysis is needed of what is happening on the ground in different countries. This needs to connect with an analysis of global geo-politics. “

Specific documented cases where rights are denied or threatened should be brought to the attention of the Special Procedures; alternative reports should be prepared for treaties in which the country is a State Party—UN, and other UN agencies—and reports submitted to the UPR process for the specific country.

SP mandate holders have also argued (at least since my tenure, in 2010) that there is a need for human rights to be integrated ACROSS all UN agencies and initiatives. We have said that we are willing and happy to assist in providing trainings/orientations in this respect. However, we find that whether or not human rights are integrated at the country/regional level is highly dependent on WHO is in charge. There are huge budget implications as well, since human rights, the third pillar of the UN, in fact, receives very little funding.2

The Human Rights processes need to be integrated, and the SDGs must be seen, analysed, and reviewed from a human rights perspective. However, this is exceedingly difficult because of the traditional way things have been, i.e., the division between human rights and development issues. The new HR indicators around the right of development can be a way forward and should be further explored. It should also be noted that the SDGs as a framework greatly reduce the role/scope of civil society in monitoring and assessments.

INTERROGATING RELIGION IN SEARCH OF GENDER JUSTICE:

I was born in Malawi, and at a very early age, I was sexually abused. That experience meant that I was very isolated as a child, and I had to learn to embrace rejection as a power and to find strength within me. I had to find my own sense of who God is to me, and that was a God who could listen to my cries, who was sympathetic to women, and who valued me for who I am. This was in spite of the patri-kyriarchal1 context where I grew up, where girls were not really valued much. So whatever I learnt from theology—the making of God as a Father, as a strict male figure—never made sense to me. Later, I joined the Circle of Concerned African Theologians, which from the time it was founded in 1989, has been working on research and understanding of religion and culture from the perspective of women, and that helped me.

So when I talk about interrogating religious resources for gender justice, I mean that I do not just embrace religion as a religious person, but I always question and challenge the understanding that discriminates women in religion.

Have you experienced any push back in terms of your beliefs questioning the patriarchal nature of religion?

Not yet as such. At WCC, there is a human sexuality reference group working on this matter, and there is also the moral discernment process dealing with how churches can sustain dialogue on issues that are still sensitive. However, since there are 348 member churches, there has not yet been consensus reached that can lead to a policy. LGBTIQ rights have become one of the most divisive issues when it comes to the unity of the church, so like any responsible fellowship of a wide constituency, they are treading wisely, sensitively, and carefully. There is however an endorsed basic ethical principle: that the protection of the dignity of every person and creation at large is fundamental to any religion. But such ethos still needs a lot of conversation to reach a point of developing or endorsing a policy on LGBTIQ rights. Some member churches have clear policies, but some do not.

Could you please give some specific examples of your experience on how religious fundamentalists challenge resolutions and agreed conclusions at the UN using fundamentalist interpretations of religious law?

• Thursdays in Black (TiB) campaign for a world without rape and violence, by the World Council of Churches (WCC), the Lutheran World Federation (LWF), Christian AIDS Bureau for South Africa (CABSA), Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA), and others. This campaign is rooted in the World Council of Churches’ Decade of Churches in Solidarity with Women (1988-1998), which was the churches’ response to the UN Decade of Women (1975-1985). During this period, the WCC, in collaboration with other ecumenical organisations such as LWF and YWCA, organised solidarity teams of women and men to visit each member of the WCC and listen to how women were experiencing the church. Through these stories, it became clear that violence against women was a reality even within churches, and with this came the acknowledgement that women have their own agency, strategies and resilience to resist and overcome violence. So TiB was inspired by several women’s protest movements including the Mothers of the Disappeared who were protesting every Thursday at the Plaza de Mayo, Buenos Aires, Argentina against the disappearance of their children under a violent dictatorship; the Women in Black in Israel who went up to protest against war and violence wearing black; the Black Sash movement in South Africa protesting against apartheid; and the movements of women in Bosnia and Rwanda who were protesting against the use of rape as a weapon of war. TiB uses black as the colour of resistance.
• Development of gender justice policies as connected to processes of gender awareness and training. Part of the acknowledgement from the above-mentioned Decade was also the reality of the discrimination of women’s voices and perspectives from decision making processes. As such, it became imperative that while there was need to change people’s mind-set through awareness raising using campaigns and trainings, there as also need to connect such to policies that can help hold institutions and communities accountable to gender justice commitments. This has led to the WCC Gender Advisory Group process towards gender justice policy, as well as the involvement in an annual gender advocacy training using international mechanisms like the UN CEDAW, UPR, and UNSCR1325. This also includes the critical engagement from an ethical perspectives to the SDG5—arguing for a gender equality and justice as the more holistic gaol than just equality.
• 16 Days of Activism’s religious resources by the WCC, LWF, Islamic Relief, Act Alliance, Anglican Communion, and the Church of Sweden. This has been a process of developing religious resources that use tools like sacred texts being read for liberation using contextual pedagogical ways; and of narratives and rituals in order to mobilise religious communities to respond to gender injustice and sexual and gender-based violence.

I do not think there should be a dichotomy between feminists/womanists and faith-based groups. I am a feminist/womanist and religious person and the two sides are not exclusive, but mutually inclusive. I know some of the most enriching developments of feminism/womanism2 have been within the religious circles of the academy and public intersecting through race, class, sexuality, politics, culture, economy and others. While for patriarchy/kyriarchy, the binaries empower the beneficiaries’ individualistic greed and help sustain their hegemony, for those of us who fight such systems of oppression, we have to embrace more integrated approaches that are mutually inclusive. It is in our solidarity and pilgrimage of sisterhood enriched by our diversity flowing together in the same river for gender justice that we find our strength to overcome such oppression.

monitoring country and regional activities

In 2015, a major breakthrough was on the verge of being realised. The Government of Tonga stated at the 59th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) in New York that it was ready to commence the process of ratifying the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).1 That process has been put on hold, however.

The ratification of CEDAW, after more than 20 years of lobbying and advocacy by women leaders and NGOs, was anticipated as the biggest step forward for the women’s rights movement in Tonga. Indeed, it is a move forward for the larger women’s rights movement in the Pacificas. Tonga, alongside Palau, are the only remaining two Pacific Island Countries left to ratify the UN Convention. Moreover, 2015 was the 20th anniversary of the Beijing Platform for Action, which is globally dubbed as the historic roadmap that set the agenda for women’s rights. Beijing was signed by 189 countries, Tonga included.

Women’s rights in Tonga have made some significant gains in the last two decades. Some of these gains included the amendment to the Nationality Act in (2007), where it enabled Tongan female citizens to register their child as a Tongan national, regardless of whether the father was a foreigner.² Another huge milestone was the enactment of the Family Protection Act (2013), which aimed to provide greater protection from domestic violence. The Act included three core measures that ensured that the rights of women were being enabled and protected: (1) increased power for police to issue protection orders on the spot, for a maximum of seven days; (2) a legal requirement to inform victims/survivors of their rights and what is involved in legal proceedings; and (3) the formation of a committee of key community stakeholders to discuss how to best monitor and evaluate the Bill.

The ratification of CEDAW, after more than 20 years of lobbying and advocacy by women leaders and NGOs, was anticipated as the biggest step forward for the women’s rights movement in Tonga. Indeed, it is a move forward for the larger women’s rights movement in the Pacificas.

However, there are still many areas where women are still struggling to find their voice. One of this is the country’s land laws, where women are still not able to own and register land. Despite attempts to recommend amendments to afford women more access and rights to land, this is an area where women continue to be economically deprived and disempowered. In the health sector, wives are still required to formally have their husband’s approval, by way of signature on a form, before a tubal ligation can be undertaken. On the other hand, when a husband requests a vasectomy, the wife’s authority is not sought.

The rights of women to freely decide about their sexual and reproductive health and rights was being condemned as un-Christian and un-Tongan. One Tongan reverend said; “Women need to know their place in the Bible and when they understand that they will come to know that they are not to decide freely, but with the consent of their husbands....” Tonga is predominately a Christian country, accounting for 95% of its population.

Despite these gaps, the Tongan government has started to report to the Universal Periodic Review Process, and has, since its last two reports, made several commitments to ensure that it will take steps to ratify CEDAW, as well as many other international human rights covenants and conventions.3 As such, its statement to the 59th CSW was welcomed as a huge step forward in terms of its commitment to realising and prioritising women’s rights post-Beijing. It sent a loud and clear message to the women’s rights movement on the ground that the government was prepared to start taking seriously the barriers and challenges that cause delayed progress for women economically, politically, socially, and culturally. Great expectations were on the horizon.

What was unexpected was the backlash received from religious fundamentalists and extremists who quickly formed support groups via social media, mass media, and local on-the-ground rallying groups whose sole purpose was to speedily bring to an end to the government’s efforts to proceed with ratification. This included fear mongering among the general public using the two most controversial issues that got the nation standing on its toes: the legalisation of abortion and same sex-marriage. Less than a day following the statement by the Tongan government at CSW, a wave of anti-CEDAW outbursts across the Tongan diaspora in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States swamped Tongan media with requests made to church leaders to respond without delay and to advise the Tongan government not to ratify the convention.

Despite CEDAW having conditions within the ratification process that are designed to protect domestic considerations, religious fundamentalists moved quickly to develop in the minds of the general public that they were protecting the nation under the auspices of culture and religion. One reverend who was one of the main organisers of the anti-CEDAW protest march stated that if Tonga allowed this convention, it would take Tonga back to pre-Christianity. In the street protest facilitated by this fundamentalist group, placards carried by the marchers proclaimed that “CEDAW is a Secret Agent of Satan,” and “CEDAW = 666! Evil!” and “CEDAW go to hell!” Churches that had representatives taking part in the anti-CEDAW protest march included the Catholic, Free Wesleyan, Tokaikolo churches, and several smaller, newly-established evangelical churches. A prominent church leader stated that the nation’s motto, “God and Tonga are my inheritance,” highlights the fact that God is first, and therefore everything has to go accordingly with God’s plans and not what the United Nations wants.

The protest march submitted a petition signed by 15,000 petitioners to the King as a formal request that he intervene and stop the government’s plans to ratify CEDAW. Two church leaders ran regular radio and TV programmes condemning the government’s move to ratify CEDAW and used Biblical texts to justify their position. They also made bold statements during these broadcasts towards pro-CEDAW supporters, and placed curses on the heads of women leading the pro-CEDAW campaign, as well as on the heads of their children, creating hate speech and anger towards pro-CEDAW supporters. Strong women’s rights activists were being labelled as anti-Christ representatives.

The impact these had on the women’s movement was felt beyond words. The psychological impact on key women’s rights activists was overwhelming to the point that close family relationships were severed and friendships lost. Children of these activists also experienced the labelling from other children and teachers at schools they attended and had to be briefed on how to handle the backlash. In as small country with a population of approximately 100,000 people, there was an immense feeling of isolation which took a toll on a number of the activists. Nonetheless, the work had to continue and the focus now is on building a larger number of activists and lobbyists to continue to support the cause.

RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

In the last few years, we have witnessed an increase in how fundamentalist groups have attacked and threatened human rights. Fareeda Afridi, a young Pakistani feminist of Pashtun origin and a women’s rights activist, was shot dead when she went to work in July 2012.¹ Meanwhile, Jennifer Markovsky, Garrett Swasey, and Ke’Arre Stewart were murdered by a Christian extremist at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, USA.²

The Latin America and the Caribbean region is no exception. In El Salvador³ and Mexico,⁴ women are sentenced to up to 30 years in prison for having abortions; in some cases, they have even been judged for having spontaneous abortions. According to a study done by Amnesty International, defenders of sexual and reproductive rights are stigmatised through widely publicised statements by authorities and individuals that compare them with criminals.⁵

Beyond the violence that these women suffer, a core problem is that fundamentalist movements are increasingly present in the field of defence of human rights with augmented financial, media, and political resources, which significantly surpass the resources of social movements, such as the feminist or SRHR movements.⁶ An example of this is the increasing presence of these groups in spaces such as the United Nations, or in areas of power and decision-making of secular States, which should by definition be independent of any religion and guarantee all rights, irrespective of religious beliefs.

As author and theologian Jean-Pierre Bastian said, “religious demand has become political action.”7 In countries like Mexico or Brazil,⁸ evangelical groups have been consolidated as political parties that have significantly interfered in democratic processes. In Brazil, for instance, it is said that the evangelical legislators⁹ were crucial in the political trial against Dilma Rouseff. Another state that blatantly violates secularism is Honduras, where the Catholic hierarchy openly supported the 2009 coup,¹⁰ and most recently, in a statement published on the official Congressional website, Evangelicals celebrated the penalisation of abortion in all its forms.

In this same fundamentalist vision, the youth are considered a sector that could be strong enough to destabilise antidemocratic political systems... In accordance with this perspective...fundamentalist groups feel that they need to promote values that control and repress young people, including weakening young people’s full exercise of sexuality.

It is important to mention that the Churches— that religion itself, for that matter—are not the problem. The problem is the fundamentalism under which their most influential leaders act: they oppose women; they are patriarchal; they are against human rights; they are violent; and they are also typically against an egalitarian society.

This vision, which goes against equality, undermines advances resulting from decades of efforts of various social movements, such as the acknowledgement of women, adolescents, and young people as human beings with rights. In this totalitarian, patriarchal, and conservative vision, women are reproductive beings that have no right to decide over their own bodies, which translates to serious setbacks on issues such as the access to legal and safe abortion.

In this same fundamentalist vision, the youth are considered a sector that could be strong enough to destabilise anti-democratic political systems, as was the case in the Arab Spring. In accordance with this perspective, in which young people are problematic, fundamentalist groups feel that they need to promote values that control and repress young people, including weakening their full exercise of sexuality. Consequently, the fight to succeed in having the necessary conditions for young people and adolescents to exercise a free and pleasant sexuality is becoming increasingly complex.

Evidence of this condescending vision and of the violation of the secular state is the fundamentalist groups’ continuous fight to eliminate specific curriculum contents on sexuality, with which they do not agree, from education in general. This is not about the need for educational systems in the region to provide comprehensive sexuality education—which, as a matter of fact, is one of the things that still needs to be accomplished. The point is that their conservative perspective establishes that sexuality education should only focus on the traditional model of family, ignoring the diversity of families that currently exist.

The recent questioning and the great mobilisation against ‘gender ideology’^11,12 is proof that progress reached is at risk. Once again, fundamentalist groups propose strengthening gender roles in which women must take care of the family in a private space, and consider homosexuality as a disease that has to be cured or should be punished.

What we, as the feminist movement and as people who work to defend sexual rights, have taken as our flag to face fundamentalist groups is the premise that secular States need to guarantee religious freedom. A secular, laic, and diverse society, as well as further progress on human rights, is essential to achieve human development.

resources

RESOURCES FROM THE ARROW SRHR KNOWLEDGE SHARING CENTRE

ARROW’s SRHR Knowledge Sharing Centre hosts a special collection of resources on gender, women’s rights, and sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). It aims to make critical information on these topics accessible to all. To contact the resource centre, write to km@arrow.org.my.

Association for Women in Development (AWID). Understanding Religious Fundamentalisms for Activists. AWID, 2014. http://www.awid.org/publications/understanding-religious-fundamentalisms-activists.

This manual provides insights on religious fundamentalism drawn from experiences of women’s rights activists in diverse regions in the world. It also sheds light on factors that lead to the growth of religious fundamentalist groups and their impact on human rights and women’s rights. The manual also includes participatory tools to encourage discussions on how religious fundamentalisms affect women’s rights activists and how activists and human rights defenders can strengthen their responses to religious fundamentalisms.

AWID. Feminists on the Frontline: Case Studies of Resisting and Challenging Fundamentalisms. AWID, March 14, 2010. http://www.awid.org/publications/feminists-frontline-case-studies-resisting-and-challenging-fundamentalisms.

This publication attempts to document case studies of activists and feminists resisting and fighting religious fundamentalisms in different geographical and socio-political contexts. By documenting their resistance, this publication also applauds the people from different regions of the world who have taken a stand against imposition of fundamentalist and regressive norms and values in the name of religion as well as to “challenge the privileged position given to religion in public policies.”

Balchin, Cassandra. Towards a Future without Fundamentalism: Analyzing Religious Fundamentalist Strategies and Feminist Responses. Edited by Deepa Shankaran. AWID, February 17, 2011. https://www.awid.org/publications/towards-future-without-fundamentalisms.

This report attempts to meet the needs expressed by a majority of women’s rights activists: more information on the phenomenon of religious fundamentalism and a deeper understanding of their construct of religion. It offers a review of economic, social, political, and historical factors that help religious fundamentalisms grow; the strategies used by religious fundamentalists to build and grow their movements; the discourses they use and the methods they use to take their agendas forward; and an analyses of feminist strategies to resist religious fundamentalisms.

Catholics for Choice. Conscience. http://consciencemag.org/.

This magazine offers in-depth coverage and analysis of contemporary intersectional issues such as reproductive rights, sexuality and gender feminism, church, religious right and state issues, and political and social issues.

This magazine offers thought-provoking reviews, opinion pieces, and policy analyses.

Gender and Sexuality Resource Centre. Kohl: A Journal for Body and Gender Research. http://gsrc-mena.org/gsrc/kohl/.

This is a biannual, multilingual journal on gender and sexuality in the Middle East, South West Asia, and North Africa region. It aims to provide a provide a non-exoticising, non-minority platform to promote independent knowledge and knowledge by young and graduate-level academics, thereby bridging the gap between activist circles and academia.”

Hélie, Anissa, ed. Dossier 32-33: Sexualities, Culture and Society in Muslim Contexts: Journal of Women Living Under Muslim Laws, July 17, 2014. http://www.wluml.org/sites/wluml.org/files/WLUML%20Dossier%2032-33%20Sexualities%20Muslim%20Contexts%202014_0.pdf.

This dossier published by Women Living Under Muslim Law (WLUML) includes articles, reports, and factual sheets from various geographical settings. It explores how men and women in different Muslim context navigate the restrictions and limitation relating to sexuality and sexual and reproductive rights. The dossier comes at a point when activists across the world are experiencing increased push to roll back existing progressive policies and legislations, and it offers valuable insight into legal and policy approaches to tackle increasing restrictions in Muslim contexts.

Imam, Ayesha. The Devil Is in the Details: At the Nexus of Development, Women’s Rights and Religious Fundamentalism. Edited by Shareen Gokal and Isabel Marler. AWID, March 22, 2016. http://www.awid.org/publications/devil-details.

This paper addresses the lack of understanding around religious fundamentalisms within the development sector. It also attempts to address and improve the understanding of how religious fundamentalisms affect development and women’s rights in particular. It also recommends strategies development practitioners can use to address and challenge structural drivers of fundamentalisms.

Mir-Hosseini, Ziba and Vanja Hamzic. Control and Sexuality: The Revival of Zina Laws in Muslim Contexts. London: Women Living Under Muslim Laws, 2010. http://www.wluml.org/sites/wluml.org/files/CaS e-book.pdf.

This book explores the historical and present-day cultural, socio-political and legal motives and contexts that have caused the revival of zina laws and reveals how zina laws, which were once obsolete and rarely applied in Muslim contexts, have now been brought back to maintain and assert control over men and women’s sexuality. It also documents civil society’s resistance to their revival, as these strategies and actions represent an invaluable legacy for all societies affected by similar challenges.

Othman, Noraini. “Muslim Women and the Challenge of Islamic Fundamentalism/Extremism: An Overview of Southeast Asian Muslim Women’s Struggle for Human Rights and Gender Equality.” Women’s Studies International Forum, 2006, 29(4): 339-353. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277539506000355.

The first part of this article identifies the issues and major challenges confronting Muslim women in Southeast Asia in the face of increasing religious extremism within the region’s Islamist movements. The second part describes what strategies women’s groups in Southeast Asia have employed to engage with these movements and surmount the challenges they posed to women’s rights and women’s access to justice under the law, particularly Muslim family laws and the state’s administrative policies and procedures relating to religion.

Sezgin, Yuksel. “Women’s Rights in the Triangle of State, Law, and Religion: A Comparison of Egypt and India.” Emory International Law Review 25:2 (2011): 1007-1028. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1982266

This essay offers case studies of women-led hermeneutics bodies in Egypt and India to examine how these communities and groups are attempting to claim the rights which have been denied to them by men-made personal status laws and religious rights movements in these countries. The essay has been divided into two parts. The first part looks at the personal status laws in Egypt and India and how they affect the rights and individual freedom of Muslim women in these two countries. The second part of the essay traces women-led hermeneutics communities and how they have claimed their rights through reinterpretive movements.

Uberoi, Diya and Beatriz Galli. “Refusing Reproductive Health Services on Grounds of Conscience in Latin America.” Sur: International Journal on Human Rights, 24(2016): 105-115. http://sur.conectas.org/en/refusing-reproductive-health-services-on-grounds-of-conscience-in-latin-america/.

This paper gives an overview of policies regulating conscientious objection in Latin America, in consideration of the increasing use of conscientious objection by medical service providers to deny women’s sexual and reproductive rights. It looks at both international human rights law, as well as state laws within the region. It proposes that states and international and regional human rights bodies continue to clarify frameworks around conscientious objection, so as to ensure that grounds of conscience do not become barriers to women realising their fundamental human rights.

OTHER RESOURCES

Austria, Carolina S. Ruiz. “The Church, the State, and Women’s Bodies in the Context of Religious Fundamentalism in the Philippines.” Reproductive Health Matters, 12 (2004): 96-103. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968808004241520.

Bennoune, Karima. Your Fatwa Does Not Apply Here: Untold Stories from the Fight Against Muslim Fundamentalism. NY: W.W. Nortan & Co, 2013. https://www.karimabennoune.com/books/your-fatwa-does-not-apply-here/.

Catholics for Choice. The Catholic Church at the United Nations: Church or State? Washington, DC: Catholics for Choice, 2013. www.catholicsforchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/CFC_See_Change_2013.pdf.

Chappell, Louise. Contesting Women’s Rights: The Influence of Religious Forces at the United Nations. Working paper. Accessed April 22, 2016. https://www.adelaide.edu.au/apsa/docs_papers/Others/Chappell.pdf.

Derichs, Claudia and Andrea Fleschenberg, eds. Religious Fundamentalisms and Their Gendered Impacts in Asia. Berlin: FriedrichEbert-Stiftung, 2010. http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/07061.pdf.

Horn, Jessica. “Christian Fundamentalism and Women’s Rights in the African Context: Mapping the Terrain.” In Feminists on the Frontline: Case Studies of Resisting and Challenging Fundamentalism. AWID, March 14, 2010. Accessed April 20, 2017. http://www.awid.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/feminists_on_the_frontline_-_christian_fundamentalisms_and_womens_rights_in_the_african_context.pdf.

ICAN and AWID. Extremism as Mainstream: Implications for Women, Development & Security in the MENA/Asia Region. 2014. http://www.icanpeacework.org/dev/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Extremism-as-Mainstream.pdf.

Mantell, Joanne E, Jacqueline Correale, Jessica Adams-Skinner and Zena A. Stein. “Conflicts between Conservative Christian Institutions and Secular Groups in Sub-Saharan Africa: Ideological Discourses on Sexualities, Reproduction and HIV/AIDS.” Global Public Health, 2001: 6 (Suppl2): S192 - S209. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3178341/.

Mehra, Madhu. Fundamentalisms in Asia Pacific: Trends, Impact, Challenges and Strategies Asserting Women’s Rights. Asia Pacific Forum on Women Law and Development (APWLD), 2008. http://apwld.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/fundamentalisms_final_pdf.pdf.

O’Brien, Jon. “Can Faith and Freedom Coexist? When Faith-based Health Providers and Women’s Needs Clash.” Gender & Development, 2017: 25, no. 1 (2017): 37-51, DOI: 10.1080/13552074.2017.1286808. Accessed May 4, 2017. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13552074.2017.1286808.

Ramakrishna, Kumar. “Religious Fundamentalism and Social Distancing: Cause for Concern?” Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) Commentary, 2016: 023. https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/CO16023.pdf.

Samuel, Reji. Impact of Religious Fundamentalism on Women and Children. Accessed April 28, 2017. https://www.academia.edu/8246269/impact_of_Religious_Fundamentalism_on_Women_and_Children?auto=download.

Sweetman, Caroline. “Introduction: Gender, Development and Fundamentalisms.” Gender & Development, 2017: 25, no. 1: 1-14, DOI: 10.1080/13552074.2017.1304063. Accessed May 4, 2017. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13552074.2017.1304063.

Tadros, Mariz. “Religion, Rights, and Gender at the Crossroads.” IDS Bulletin, 2011: 42, no. 1 (2011). Accessed May 4 2017. http://bulletin.ids.ac.uk/idsbo/issue/view/39.

Tamale, Sylvia. “Controlling Women’s Fertility in Uganda: Perspectives on Religion, Law, and Medicine.” Sur: International Journal on Human Rights, 24(2016): 117-128, http://sur.conectas.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/11-sur-24-ing-sylvia-tamale.pdf.

Tomalin, Emma, ed. Gender, Faith, and Development. Oxfam GB, 2011. http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/gender-faith-and-development-144042.

SELECTED ARROW RESOURCES

Aside from ARROW for Change, which is produced in English and translated strategically in various Asia-Pacific and global languages, ARROW also develops cutting edge publications. Below are key ARROW publications from the past five years. All resources from 1993 to the present can be downloaded at http://arrow.org.my/publications-overview/.

ARROW AND PARTNERS’ RESOURCES ON RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISMS

Abdul Cader, Azra. Inclusive Families: Realising Gender Equality, SRHR, and Human Rights. 2017. http://bit.ly/InclusiveFamilies.

ARROW. Surfacing: Selected Papers on Religious Fundamentalisms and Their Impact on Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights. 2008. http://bit.ly/SurfacingImpactofRF.

ARROW. ARROWs for Change, Vol. 14, nos. 1 & 2: Keeping the Faith: Overcoming Religious Fundamentalisms. 2008. http://bit.ly/AFCvol14nos1and2.

Bakhadda, Fadoua. Religious Fundamentalism and Access to Safe Abortion Services in Morocco. Moroccan Family Planning Association (MFPA) & ARROW: 2016. http://bit.ly/RF-Morocco-Abortion.

Balasubramanian, P., Rajalakshmi Ram Prakash, and N Srilakshmi. Religious Fundamentalism and Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) in South India. Rural Women’s Social Education Centre and ARROW. 2016. http://bit.ly/RF-India-CSE.

Brohi, Nazish and Sarah Zaman. Impact of Fundamentalism Discourses on Family Planning Practices in Pakistan. Shirkat Gah—Women’s Resource Centre & ARROW. 2016. http://bit.ly/RF-Pakistan-FP.

Daniel, Smriti, Zainab Ibrahim, Darshi Thoradeniya, Edna Malkanthi, and Evangeline de Silva. Ethno-Religious Nationalism and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Sri Lanka: A Social Media, Print Media and Policy Review. Women and Media Collective & ARROW. 2016. http://bit.ly/RF-SriLanka-SRHR.

Melgar, Junice and Jocelyn Carrera-Pacete. Understanding Catholic Fundamentalism in the Philippines: How Conservative Religious Teachings on Women, Family and Contraception Are Wielded to Impede the Reproductive Health Law and Other Reproductive Health Policies. LIKHAAN & ARROW. 2016. http://bit.ly/RF-Philippines-RH.

Osman, Ratna. “Thematic Paper 5: Religious Extremisms and Its Impact on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights of Women and Young People in the Asia-Pacific Region.” In Action for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights: Strategies for the Asia-Pacific beyond ICPD and the MDGs: Thematic Papers— Beyond ICPD and the MDGs, ARROW, 107-120. 2012. http://bit.ly/Action4SRHR-ThematicPapers.

Sabina, Nazme. Religious Extremism and Comprehensive Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Secondary and Higher Secondary Education in Bangladesh. Naripokkho & ARROW. 2016. http://bit.ly/RF-Bangladesh-CSE.

Society for Health Education (SHE). Perceptions of Islam and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Maldives. SHE & ARROW. 2016. http://bit.ly/RF-Maldives-SRHR.

OTHER ARROW RESOURCES

2014-2017

Various Authors. Call for Action to Integrate SRHR into the Post-2015 Agenda. Available for Africa, Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Lao PDR (in English and Lao), Pakistan, and Latin America and the Caribbean (in English and Spanish).

Various Authors. Country Profile Series on Universal Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health. Available for Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Lao PDR (also available in Lao), Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka (available in English, Sinhala, and Tamil), and Vietnam.

Various Authors. Country Profile Series on Universal Access to Sexual and Reproductive Rights. Available for Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Lao PDR (also available in Lao), Malaysia, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam.

2017

Das, Arpita. Right to Sexuality: Intersections with Education, Employment, Law and Citizenship.

2016

ARROW. Myanmar/Burma Country Study: Breaking Barriers: Advocating SRHR (also available in Burmese).

ARROW. Stories of Change: Sharing Success Stories of Women’s Health and Rights Advocacy Partnership—South Asia.

Das, Arpita. Universal Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights—Regional Profile: Asia.

DEFINITIONS

Ethno-religious Nationalism: Ideology “fuelled by both ethnic and religious identity, and which reinforces that the political legitimacy of the state is primarily derived from adherence to religious doctrines. Ethno-religious nationalism seeks to fuse the state, geographical territory, culture, and religious text, and impose and define it through bodies.”1

Fundamentalist Movements:² “Political movements with religious, ethnic, and/or nationalist imperatives. They construct a single version of a collective identity as the only true, authentic and valid one, and use it to impose their power and authority over ‘their’ constituency (which varies from a particular community to most, if not all, of humanity). They usually claim to be the representatives of authentic tradition, and they speak against the corrupting influence of modernity and ‘the West’ (which non-westerners tend to regard as the same thing). However, fundamentalists are far from being pre-modern. In order to promote their project, they use all modern technological means available, from the media to weaponry. Furthermore, the vision they conjure up is a constructed and selective vision, rather than a revival of something in the past.”

“Beyond this common ground, which virtually always locates them on the extreme right of the political spectrum, fundamentalist projects can be very different from each other. They can use holy texts and be linked with specific charismatic leaderships; they can appear as a form of traditional orthodoxy or, as a revivalist radical phenomenon fighting against traditional corrupt leaderships.”

Multiculturalism:³ “[O]ften used in two or three different ways that are conflated. One way in which it is used is to describe a society in which people of many different origins live—this can be used both as a factual description or as a normative one, describing a certain kind of a political, social and cultural ideal. Multiculturalism is also used as a description of a social policy which respects cultural differences...”

Religious Extremism:⁴ “Rigid interpretations of religion that are forced upon others using social or economic coercion, laws, intolerance, or violence. It is accompanied by non-fluid definitions of culture, religion, nationalism, ethnicity or sect, which move citizens into exclusionary, patriarchal and intolerant communities. Only a small percentage of religious conservatives are extremist in this sense....[R]eligious extremism has appeared in many different regions of the world and has been associated with various religions. The use of violence justified for religious ends is a characteristic of some extremist movements, but not all.”

“Women are directly and deliberately targeted by extremist movements in both subtle and overt ways. Extremist forces are exerting strong pressure to restrict women’s legal rights and circumscribe women’s participation in civic and political life. Women have also experienced more direct physical insecurity, sexual harassment, and assault in public settings.”

Religious Fundamentalisms:⁵ While the term is contested, religious fundamentalisms is often used as it remains the one “most commonly understood by activists and used in academic literature, and that can most easily be applied across a variety of contexts.” It refers to “ideologies which exhibit the following features:

• The use of religion, often along with other identity markers, to gain political, social and economic power;
• The use of the same to justify discrimination, intolerance and violations of human rights;
• The control of women’s bodies and sexuality as a central avenue of social control;
• The reinforcement of male authority and rigid, heteronormative, and patriarchal gender relationships;
• Reference to a specific interpretation and practice of religion as the only truth and only legitimate way of being;
• The use of coercion and violence to impose this ideology;
• A communal identity of ‘us’ against all others.”

Secularism: Entails two principles: “the strict separation of the state from religious institutions” and “that the people of different religions and beliefs, within the state, are equal before the law.” The separation of religion from state is the underpinning of secularism. It is meant to guarantee “that religious groups do not interfere in affairs of state, and makes sure the state doesn’t interfere in religious affairs.... [S]ecularism...does not seek to challenge the tenets of any particular religion or belief, neither does it seek to impose atheism on anyone.”6