Are gender quota laws the only way to reach gender parity in politics?

In 1997 Venezuela adopted quota laws in which 30% of lower and upper legislative chambers had to be women representatives. (Schwindt-Bayer, 2009, p.8).

Alba Carosio, co-founder and director of the Center for Women’s Studies in Venezuela, argues that, there is a logical theory behind gender parity in politics in which half the population is composed of women thus half the decision making power should be controlled by women (Martinez, 2010, p.74). This was the logic supporting women’s demands for political inclusion. In response to this theory and women’s demands for representation, quota laws were created. In the 1990s, quota laws were made in Argentina, Venezuela, and Brazil among other countries in Latin America. In 1991, Argentina was the first to adopt a quota law in the lower legislative chamber (Schwindt-Bayer, 2009, Table 1). These quotas expanded into the upper levels of the legislative chambers and were implemented in a domino effect all over Latin America and the world.

Feminists argued that working within the state organization for change towards gender equality was not the only route to be pursued. By also working outside the current power structures and creating new ones, they argued women would be able to more effectively push for their demands. Herrera (2010) believed “As long as we continue working from the margins, unable to form a critical mass, we will remain a minority, used either to fulfill the diversity quotas or to serve as decorative objects” (p.303). Here Herrera is stating the need for mass mobilization by women in addition to advocating for substantive policy changes. 

Quota laws can be seen as an example of women being ‘decorative objects’, the presence of gender inclusive language in the law is an example of women working within the state apparatus to make legitimate changes in women’s lives. Quota laws are seen by some as an ineffective way to address gender inequality in politics. Others argue that quota laws are a way to increase the presence of women in political decision making and potentially increase the influence of feminists in politics.

What do quota laws really achieve? Is affirmative action in this way an efficient tool in lessening the gender gap in politics?

While quota laws have helped to increase women’s involvement in political decision-making, separate women’s organizations can be utilized as well. Venezuela’s women’s research centers (CEM) and women’s NGOs assisted in the 1999 constitution revisions. The constitution of Venezuela is a key component in women’s struggle for equality. By creating a state standard upheld by the President himself, the objectives of gender equality will continue to reach lower levels of society. 

The answer to the above question is a grey one. Public policy is not the only route for women’s equality initiatives. In addition, and perhaps simultaneously, women in Venezuela have been working from the bottom up to meet the state in the middle. The masses of women have learned to read and write, to run a business, to organize and lobby against the state until their demands have been met. Without the push from below and the support from above, women’s mobilization in Venezuela would not have been as successful as it has been.

In 1999, Venezuela's gender quota laws were rescinded. Venezuela's case proves that quota laws or affirmative action measures are not the only means of creating gender equality in political decision making processes. 

Table of Gender Quota Laws for the Legislative Branch in Latin America

Country	Chamber	Year Created
Argentina	Lower	1991
Bolivia	Lower & Upper	1997
Brazil	Lower	1997
Costa Rica	Unicameral	1996
Dominican Republic	Lower	1997
Ecuador	Unicameral	1997
Guyana	Unicameral	2000
Honduras	Unicameral	2000
Mexico	Lower & Upper	2002
Panama	Unicameral	1997
Paraguay	Lower & Upper	1996
Peru	Unicameral	1997
Venezuela	Lower & Upper	1997

Sources: (Schwindt-Bayer, 2009, p.8).

History of Women in Venezuela

Table of the History of Venezuela from the 1950s-2000s in regards to the political state, economy, and women’s mobilization

Decade	Politics	Economy	Women’s Mobilization
1950s	Dictatorship	Increased oil revenues funded infrastructure projects. Limited government spending on social services.	Cross-class mobilization. Demands for democracy.
1960s	Democracy	Increased government spending on social services to poor populations. The creation of OPEC. Economic growth at 5.5 % annually.	De-mobilization, emergence of multiple political parties.
1970s	Democracy	Oil boom in world, SELA created, increase in employment percentage.	Cross-class mobilization. Demands for equality in home and domestic violence laws.
1980s	Neoliberalism	World Economic Crisis, oil bust. Unemployment at 20%.	De-mobilization.
1990s	Neoliberalism and beginning of transformation to Socialism.	Foreign debt at an all time high, increased poverty and decline in social services to people. IMF Structural Readjustment programs.	Cross-class mobilization. Demands for social services. Political quota laws implemented.
2000s	Transition to Socialism	Economy struggling, yet increase in state funded social services to people.	Cross-class mobilization. Demands for political inclusion and gender inclusiveness.
2010	Twenty-first Century Socialism	Economy still struggling. New social missions emerge.	Cross-class mobilization. Women are empowered by social missions, new demands for gender sensitivity in media and education.

Sources: (Timeline Venezuela, 2012), (Venezuela Country Studies, 1990), (World Economic Outlook Database, 2006), (The World Factbook, 2012), (Venezuela’s Naitonal Statistics Institute, 2006).

Women’s Mobilization in Venezuela: A Historical View

Women in Venezuela have historically organized around their gender identity working together to put pressure on the state in order to have their demands met. Today women are mobilizing around issues related to improvements in economic status, increased women representatives in leadership positions, reproductive and sexual rights, and domestic violence. (Friedman, 2009) The most effective times of mobilization came in the late 1950s, 1970s, and early 1990s and today in which women were able to mobilize in large masses and put pressure on the state causing legislative changes. In each period, the state’s actions shaped the way women mobilized, especially in regards to the state’s transition from dictatorship to democracy to socialism.

In 1958, there was significant cross-party and cross-economic organizing among women since they had a common interest of ending the dictatorship of Jimenez. (Friedman, 1998, 100) The new political leadership during the period of transition to democracy included women by either adopting them into traditional gender roles of the political parties or inclusion by male association only. During the transition phase towards democracy in the 1960s women demobilized due to partisan rivalry. (Friedman, 1998, 126)

In the 1970s women mobilized around legal reforms, the need for women’s state agencies, and the democratization of the home. (Rakowski, 2003, 392) It was during this time period that women were successful in mobilizing for the first national women’s agency, the Presidential Women’s Advisory Commission (COFEAPRE). (Rakowski, 2003a) One of the biggest demands of women in the 1970s was the reform of the Civil Code. The Civil Code was an important feat because prior to the reform children were labeled as illegitimate if their parents were not married and were thus granted fewer rights than legitimate children. Moreover, fathers had no legal obligation to pay child support. (Martinez, 2010, 69)

With the end of the oil boom and world economic crisis in the early 1980s; the devaluation of the Bolivar began to increase extreme poverty in the country. This was the catalyst to the 1989 IMF imposed Structural Readjustment Program that caused chaos in the country. Due to large increases in basic food, gasoline, and transportation costs, the people of Venezuela began looting and rioting in the streets. By 1989, economic hardship forced women to fight for issues on employment, income, food, and subsidies that men were also rallying around. (Rakowski, 2003, 394) By 1990, women were organizing next to men around the creation of a stable democracy for the entire country. “Poverty rates have been closely connected to economic cycles. The total poverty headcount ratio has risen from an estimated 33 per cent in 1975 to 53 per cent in 1988, 64 per cent in 1990 and a peak of 70 per cent in 1995. Later it decreased to 53 per cent in 1997, 41 per cent in 2000 and 39 per cent in 2001.” 

By 1998, when Hugo Chavez was elected President, women were united and ready for change after coming out of the 1989 disaster and neoliberal presidency of Perez. In 1999, through feminist intervention and pressure, Chavez’s new constitutional convention created prohibitions against gender discrimination through the use of gender-inclusive language in the constitution. In 2000, INAMUJER (National Women’s Institute) was created with members of the 22,000 small, state supported women’s groups throughout the country. These groups have been participating in the Missions receiving health care, education, and micro finance opportunities.

In 2003, women organized again across political lines in an effort to protest against the removal of Articles 3 and 39 from the 1998 Law against Violence against Women and the Family. However, the Supreme Court denied their measures. (Rakowski, 2010, 265) Here women were mobilizing against the state and for their human rights. In 2006, the anti-violence law was passed in which rape became a crime and domestic violence courts were created. (Rakowski, 2010, 266) In 2007, the state created a new Domestic Violence law. The world economic crisis that hit in 2008 did not leave Venezuela unaffected. The decline in oil income caused the state to make massive budget cuts particularly in social welfare programs causing people from the middle and lower classes to object. (Rakowski, 2010, 267)

Today, women have duties and opportunities in the Venezuelan Armed Forces. “Carmen Melendez, first Admiral of Venezuela, said on Sunday that the full inclusion of Venezuelan women in the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB) has been achieved during Hugo Chavez’s presidential rule.”  This change in women’s role is in part due to the state taking on new forms of speech when engaging the debate around socialism to include women as a key element. “Socialists must be feminists or they won’t be complete human beings. With the support of our women we must strengthen unity in Venezuela... We have to take firm steps towards...the total emancipation of gender and be more just with our women…there is no socialism without feminism.” –Hugo Chavez quote excerpts. (Pearson, 1) Chavez is the first President in Venezuelan history to say publicly that he is a feminist and that feminism is part of socialism. Here Chavez’s rhetoric is creating many outcomes. First, that women and their empowerment are crucial to the success of the socialist state. Second, that women can, and are, allowed to move outside the traditional role and into the military, economic, and political sectors.

Some women believe the increased relationship between the state and women’s mobilizing is indeed problematic. Institutional strengthening is not the route most helpful in creating change, instead grassroots and community building keep the power within the hands of the people. (Martinez, 2010, 89) I argue that historically women’s ability to mobilize with or against the state has been largely affected by class and the economy. While there is still much to be done in the name of women’s equality in Venezuela, history has shown that leadership within the women’s movement has organically grown from the bottom up and will continue with or without the support of the government.

Sources: Friedman, E. (2009). Gender, Sexuality and the Latin American Left: testing the transformation. Third World Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp 415-433. Friedman, E. (1998). Paradoxes of Gendered Political Opportunity in the Venezuelan Transition to Democracy. Latin American Research Review, vol. 33, 3. Rakowski, C. A. (2003). Women's Coalitions as a Strategy at the Intersection of Economic and Political Change in Venezuela. International Journal Of Politics, Culture & Society, 16(3), 387. Martinez, Carlos. (2010). Venezuela Speaks! Voices from the Grassroots. PM Press. Rakowski, Cathy and Gioconda, Espina. (2010). Women’s Struggles for Rights in Venezuela: Opportunities and Challenges. Women’s Activism in Latin America and the Caribbean: Engendering Social Justice, Democratizing Citizenship. Elizabeth Maier. Pearson, Tamara. (2012). Chavez’s Inconsistent Feminism. Venezuela Analysis website: http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/6743

Madres Del Barrio (Mothers of the Slum)

     Under President Hugo Chavez, women have been mobilized to engage in his ‘participatory’ democracy while advocating for the Bolivarian Revolution. “Chavez has added a third discourse for women: ‘the country needs revolutionary mothers to advance social change.’ This discourse both honors and reinforces women’s traditional roles as self-sacrificing mothers and wives…” (Rakowski, 2008, 18) The leadership of current President and possible re-elect, Hugo Chavez, has defined the social and political background in Venezuela for the past thirteen years. Under his administration he has created the 1999 Constitution with various changes directly affecting those that have been marginalized over the past decades. Venezuela presents itself as a leading country in Latin America, determined to create a new socialist region. Yet, how does Chavez’s twenty first century socialism (social equality) empower a large part of the population, women?

    In 1999, through feminist intervention and pressure, Chavez’s new constitutional convention created prohibitions against gender discrimination through the use of gender-inclusive language in the constitution. In 2000, INAMUJER (National Women’s Institute) was created with members of the 22,000 small, state supported women’s groups throughout the country. Ellner (2007, 151) argues that the 1999 Constitution has opened new possibilities for social organizations to interact with the state and thus provide a participatory democracy for Venezuelans. Rakowski (2008) states that the core group of feminists has succeeded in working together, supporting and sustaining five specific actions for the government to take in regards to feminist ratifications. Of those five, one was the Social Security Act and Article 88 of the Constitution which states: “Create a new Social Services Act that would enable the payment of monetary allowance to homemakers (based on the minimum wage).”(Rakowski, 2008, 23)

Article 88 of the Constitution states:
“The state guarantees the equality and equitable treatment of men and women in the exercise of the right to work. The state recognizes work at home as an economic activity that creates added value and produces social welfare and health. Housewives are entitled to Social Security in accordance with the law.” (VIO, 2008, http://womenandcuba.org/Documents/viowomen.pdf)

    Following the 1999 Constitution came Chavez’s social welfare missions targeted at helping the poor out of poverty. Chavez’s first program focused on health care for people living in barrios outside the largest cities. With the help of Cuban doctors, and the recently turned state owned oil industry the social programs were deemed to be successful. Quickly thereafter more programs were created to include adult literacy, higher education scholarships/cash transfers, identification card access, the building of cheap stores in poor neighborhoods, women’s business training, and women’s housework payments. A majority of participants in these programs are women as are a majority of the workers and volunteers that facilitate these programs in the communities.

    Once women are accepted into the program via an extensive multi-step application process, they receive 80% of the regular minimum wage which is about 1,780 Bsf/mo= 1,424 Bsf/mo.=$331 USD at the 4.3 legal currency exchange rate for 1-2 years. During this 1 to 2 year program the participants have to attend job training, be part of a community committee, and start a cooperative with other women. They are not allowed to have their own business and by the end of the program they need to present their coop project in order to get approved for a loan.

    Questions remain however, as how effective and dependent these social missions are, especially a conditional cash transfer program like Madres Del Barrio? Also, what is the relationship between the development programs put in place under Chavez and women’s ability to mobilize? Since this program is specifically targeted at women, how does it change the relationship between women and the state? In this program, women are extremely dependent on state funds and training. How have such programs and Article 88 of the 1999 Constitution influenced the feminist movement?


Read more on the program at http://www.minmujer.gob.ve/madresdelbarrio/

Sources:
Rakowski, C. A., & Espina, G. (2008). The Gendered Nature of Venezuelan Populism. Conference Papers - American Sociological Association, 1.
Ellner, S., & Tinker Salas, M. (2007). Venezuela : Hugo Chávez and the decline of an "exceptional democracy" / edited by Steve Ellner and Miguel Tinker Salas. Lanham, Md. : Rowman & Littlefield Pub., c2007.

Political Graffiti

“A trench of ideas is bigger than a trench of stones.” Jose Marti (Cuban Revolutionary Hero)

This was quoted by a Venezuelan community radio station coordinator in the beautiful countryside of Sanare. Here we see images of Simon Bolivar, Che Guevara, and Hugo Chavez. These are painted murals throughout the country of national hero’s and icons for the unification of the Latin American countries in Chavez’s Bolivarian Revolution. 

                                                                          Sanare

Some of these murals are painted by independent artists, but majority are painted by Chavistas and government sponsored “mural committees” that paint the country red. 

While Venezuela is no exception to the use of graffiti, other countries like Mexico, Columbia, and Argentina have a history of this sort of artistic expression. It is no doubt part of a greater scheme; while some part of it is owned by the grassroots and marginalized population and used as an outlet of opinion. There is this other wave of political graffiti used to help create the idea of a nation-state. These images seen across Venezuela are examples of the symbolism used to put a face on democracy. As they say a picture is worth a thousand words; what are these images saying to the people? Are they really by the people for the people? Has the government tapped into the underground culture and created an artistic political expression?

                                                                      Sanare

There is a difference of course between the image of Che, Bolivar, and Chavez; yet how often do we hear Chavez quoting these iconic heroes? "The most perfect system of government is the one which produces the greatest possible happiness...” -Simon Bolivar. I heard this quote many times over from different people while interviewing radio stations, religious organizations, government workers...the heroes are engrained in Venezuelan history and without them there could not have been a revolution...right?

                                                                    Barquisimeto

                                                       Caracas- In favor of Opposition

Americans in a Crossfire

Americans in a Crossfire

On August 12, 2012 a group of Americans and Canadians walk out of the Caracas Metro station to a downtown area prepared for a political rally in support of the opposition Presidential candidate, Henrique Capriles. 

As we walk off the escalator we somehow enter a crossfire between Chavez supporters and Capriles supporters yelling inaudible “boo’s” and “chants” at each other, obviously trying to out shout the other. There is a sense of tension between the two groups and I start to feel nervous about being in the middle. Our translator, Leo Lameda, initiates conversation with a Chavez supporter whom was also his high school history teacher, Lobeila Escobar. She talks about media manipulation especially U.S. media in which they demonize Chavez and hype up the violence in Venezuela. She has been an active Chavez supporter for years and believes he will be elected President again for a third six year term this October. We migrate around her as onlookers join our circle in order to hear her voice.

A local student camera crew join us and want to ask us, the Americans, about our experience here and opinions on the current political situation in Venezuela. A man with a Capriles flag steps in front of a female Chavez supporter chanting louder and louder by the second. There’s a moment of hostility as he makes his way to the ‘right’ side of the rally and political spectrum. She stands proudly on the left and as the next metro full of passengers disembarks into our space, shouts from both sides guide the passengers to the proper position. 

We interview a couple Capriles supporters on the outer skirts of the rally. The older man’s reference to anti-semitism could be related to the fact that Capriles has a Jewish ancestry. The younger woman references the New Organic Law of Civil Penalties which states: “In Venezuela, in January 2012, a new Organic Law against Terrorism and Organized Delinquency was adopted by Congress, but has not yet been signed into law by the President. The law establishes a broad definition of “terrorist acts” that may apply to legitimate acts of social protest or dissidence. It also places NGOs under the permanent surveillance of a State organ and imposes restrictions on foreign funding.” -United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, 4/25/2012 http://www.un-ngls.org/spip.php?page=article_s&id_article=3853 

It’s interesting to note that this law imposes restrictions on foreign funding, which suggests an anti-U.S. electoral endorsement of any kind for any candidates in Venezuela.  Is this a bad thing? How much endorsements from corporations does our U.S. candidates receive? The young woman’s insinuation of Chavez promoting violence could be linked to the division among Venezuelans. And how Venezuela has been undergoing a class struggle due to government reforms against privatization and a transition to a socialist economy. Through these measures redistribution of wealth and high influence jobs have caused the wealthy and middle class to lose previous privileges such as land and corporate investment.