FEMINIST AGENDAS OF THE WORLD AND SOCIAL CONSENSES
This decade has witnessed the deepening of a global movement that has been claiming, at least for a couple of centuries, "equality" between women and men. Today this defense would seem common, since this "symmetry" is a value that is acquiring, not without resistances, greater strength in the formation of new generations.
Until the nineteenth century the idea was quite different. Worthy of a science fiction film or a "dystopia" in the idealistic eyes, the role of women was subordinate to man and confined to the realization of domestic work. His political participation was so restricted that he lacked access to vote or deliberate in public spaces, in an open and tolerated way, on political issues. «What can a woman know about politics?". It was a question that men were made until not long ago and a statement that was expressed with more recurrence than is heard today. Seen with the increasingly influential principles of substantive equality, the treatment of women was inadmissible, although for those contexts, this subordination was appreciated as normal and there was not too much public interest in emancipating it.
In the 18th century he began to reflect, with daring and seriousness, the role of women. One of the pioneer narratives was the one raised by Mary Wollstonecraft in his work "vindication of women’s rights". Among his ideas, disruptive to the time, their criticisms of this strongly shared vision that women should be excluded from the educational sphere highlighted. Wollstonecraft alluded to the contribution that the woman denoted as the main trainer within the family nucleus, adding that as that impact was replicated and multiplied in the whole of a nation, the recognition of new rights was just. Some decades later, in 1848, the "declaration of feelings of Seneca Falls" was announced in the United States of America, a work in which a group of associations endowed the woman with political, social, civil and religious rights. However, it would not be in Europe or in America where the aspiration of women’s non -restrictions would materialize.
New Zealand would be, in 1883, the first nation to recognize and make effective the suffrage of women nationwide, providing women with the character of "citizens". Almost half a century later, Mexico would join this inclusive wave of women’s rights, to constitutionalize, in October 1953, that “they are citizens of the Republic the men and women who, having the quality of Mexicans, meet, in addition, in addition, in addition,, the following requirements: have turned 18, being married, or 21 if they are not, and have an honest way of living ». Citizens then gave the right to vote and be chosen.
The demands of women have changed over time, and although multiple and diverse for contexts, situations and problems, today they keep in common the eradication of any form of violence and discrimination. Currently, legal equality has been achieved, but most voices argue that this has not disrupted real systemic conditions (mainly economic and labor) thought or favorable for men.
In a classification effort, the course of this fight for women could be identified in three stages: the recognition of their rights;its effective application and the progressive implementation of a true culture of "gender transversalization". This last stage would imply a social change, and one of its challenges would be related to the fact that wide spheres, in almost all countries of the world, do not know or accept the laws or new social relations that reposition women in the contextpublic. A radical, but consistent argument attributes to a "process of deconstruction" (both in men and women) the possibility of that generational social change.
In Mexico, socially endorsed practices persist where a woman can be retained by a man for appropriation and conception purposes. Women’s trade subsists in many regions, as well as the culture that parents offer or give their daughter in marriage, without media, on her opinion or seem. In high -level circles, in metropolitan and cosmopolitan cities, male discrimination towards women continues to express, openly or veiled, due to intellectual inferiority or inability for them to develop certain activities under the argument that marriage and maternity are obstacles are obstaclesinsurmountable. Although efforts have been made to reduce salary gaps, economic discretion prevails from the gender criteria. Finally, university classrooms have not saved themselves from the propagation of this form of thought. To say at least, the "glorifiers" of the golden age of ancient Greece as a democratic reference omit that political participation was exclusively a matter of free and properties.
We agree with the importance of a social change, but we focus our attention on the modality and direction of that change. Even when we agree with the various diagnoses of the situation and that it is imperative to modify patterns, behaviors, mentalities and laws, there are dissent points that will be temporarily impassable and that they cannot prevent the radicalization of positions in this universe of micromovimientos. To this is added that, by definition, social change will lead time to unfold, and the requirement of immediacy by some groups will be a variable to consider, even, by whom they support the central arguments of the feminist movement or the new male masculinities. In what conditions can a social change in the short term be specified? What measures could favor "deconstruction" (understood as criticism and elimination) of traditional formations in an immediate process?
Although one of the triggers of this universe of movements is and remains the violence against women (solution that under no circumstances must be postponed), the demand for prompt attention to "radical approaches" that are formulated in certain feminist agendas will run intowith possible brakes or decisions. Although governments design policies and found institutions to respond to these agendas, claims that profile deepest and structural changes run the risk of being contained. And it is likely that before this refusal some groups continue to justify the hostile route.
We do not know that the "violent route" has been a variable that has historically influenced the precipitation of social changes. But in plural societies, with constitutional systems that guarantee civil freedoms and rights and institutions from democratic designs, these actions seem not to be, in the eyes of the majority that make up the social agreement, a legitimate or approved ally. This is because these procedures, as forms of manifestation and solution, are probably not consented by a large majority of feminist expressions.
However, we consider that the strength of these agendas will result in themselves insufficient to insert itself into government affairs. The foregoing, even when we have witnessed the public expressions of March 8, with their due proportions, reproduced that vibrant and unity climate that characterized the protests of the late sixties or to which they have opposed the intervention of thecountries in military conflicts. The movements have turned out to be more effective in achieving their objectives, the more pressure they exercise, plus territorial extension covers and more resources articulate;But we consider that by themselves they will not be ableThe approval of legal reforms.
While some political scientists have made "prediction" a "method of analysis" and in whose expertise they usually shipwreck, we think, not as a recommendation to feminist expressions, but as an exercise of analysis around probabilities of success, which will prosper the pointsof the agendas that are accompanied by a broad social consensus, through a gradual but continuous process, and preserving the majority belief that courage is not synonymous with violence. We are against, of course, rightly or not, vandalism and arguments that judge or value individuals from a group identity perspective.
Leave feedback