A year ago, groups dedicated to gender equality were steeling themselves against a Trump presidency sequel. Hardly anyone anticipated. The sheer number and rapid pace of executive orders emanating from the White House were regarded as a premeditated approach to paralyze through overload. In many ways it worked â there was confusion, anger and exhaustion as groups rushed to fill the gap left by a sudden aid suspension. But that was just the beginning.
The American government has been the primary force, complemented by intense advocacy work by far-right organisations exploiting the situation to strengthen global ties with sympathetic regimes.
The movement against gender equality denotes an international coalition of political leaders, religious institutions, civil society groups as well as affluent financiers and clans that strive to weaken progress across a wide spectrum of issues. Areas targeted involve reproductive choice, queer and transgender freedoms, diverse family models, and honest sex ed.
They accomplish their goals by lobbying governments, supporting court cases, discrediting international efforts to advance equality, spreading disinformation, and funding non-profit organisations.
We analyze five junctures that shaped the security, respect, and well-being of women and girls.
In early spring, a month and a half following a prominent humanitarian funder is frozen, causing turmoil around the world, a top American diplomat reveals that the lion's share of the body's projects will be terminated. US diplomats, past leaders and humanitarian and health experts decry the decision, stating that lives will be lost. Activists say that the dismantling of this institution is more than a funding crisis, it is a savage attack on human rights and access to contraception and reproductive health services. A multitude of agencies say females will bear the brunt by diminishing aid, especially in conflict areas. As the year ends, statistics reveal how a tremendous loss of life has already occurred from illness, famine, inadequate obstetric services, and violence against women, with a far greater catastrophe looming. Two other major donor nations proceed with parallel slashes. A director of a global justice organization says a choice to reduce international development funding is a gesture of alignment with another government's agenda.
In the same month, several Christian-right organisations meet in an upmarket New York hotel for a strategic summit held concurrently with the international conference on women's rights. It is an chance to exchange strategies on how to counter the UN's progressive policies. They are in high spirits as they applaud new Washington directives on gender, diversity and abortion. Meanwhile, the UN secretary general opens the global conference with a somber alert that âthe toxin of gendered hierarchyâ is resurgent, after a analysis demonstrates that opponents of gender equality are deliberately weakening longstanding consensus on key womenâs rights issues around the world.
Over the warmer months, a cluster of meetings in Africa themed around the conventional household and state autonomy triggers anxiety among human rights defenders. In the start of May, a president and first lady open a major forum to resist what they label external influences undermining local norms. A few days later, another Pan-African conference on conservative ethics is held. Both events are attended by leading US and European anti-rights figures, including presidents of prominent organizations. One speaker urges African NGOs to push back against âinternational liberal agendaâ of international organizations. In June, a global faith group hosts a family strengthening conference in the region, an event that reproductive rights advocates say has become a stage for criticizing gender equality. Activists observe that the scale of their presence has expanded considerably.
As clinics in sub-Saharan Africa report they are running out of contraceptives, including prophylaxis for assault victims, the US announces in July plans to dispose of a vast stockpile of birth control held in a warehouse in Europe. A major reproductive health federation states that their destruction will deny a huge female population from access to birth control, and lead to hundreds of thousands of unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions. The organization labels the plan an ideological decision âabout exporting a regressive policy worldwideâ and âan intentional act of reproductive coercionâ. A renowned doctors' group calls it âheartless and dangerousâ. Charities attempt to acquire the contraceptives so they can reach their intended destinations, but the US rejects each bid. The situation remains at a standstill as local authorities will not allow the destruction of viable medicines.
Bringing back the anti-abortion funding ban, which halts US aid to groups that provide, advocate for or advise on abortion services overseas, is typical of certain US administrations. It was widely expected when the ban was reimposed in the first month of the year. The administration also rejoined an international anti-abortion agreement. But in the autumn, the US announces it intends to expand the global gag rule to include national governments and international bodies in addition to NGOs, and to include DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) projects. Further specifics about the expansion of the rule are expected in early 2026. A leader in global maternal health says extending the reach will have âdevastating consequencesâ. Pro-choice activists fear that upcoming Washington funding agreements being negotiated with countries in Africa will become conditional on accepting the new, wider policy.
Elena Voss is a seasoned journalist and editor with over a decade of experience in digital media, specializing in global affairs and tech trends.