Search

In recent years, the gender agenda has permeated all policy areas and has gained relevance through the constant work of organisations that have succeeded in making issues and challenges visible. This paper examines the interaction between international politics and the gender agenda in Argentina during the presidency of Alberto Fernández (2019-2023). Based on a triangulation of information gathered from interviews, official documents, and news reports, the paper aims to analyse, in the context of recent foreign policy, what kind of decisions are linked to the gender agenda, and at the same time, what international projection the gender policies implemented at the local level have. We propose that the gender agenda has opened up a space in Argentine foreign policy in a short period and that it has done so mainly based on the country’s trajectory in the international sphere linked to human rights and the discussion of inequalities in the world. The creation of the Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity has been crucial, projecting the country into global gender debates in an institutionalised way. Although concrete policies are developing in some cases, the agendas in this dual track demonstrate that these profound social demands have come to the state to stay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the return to democracy in our country, many different movements, having different aims appeared. Among them, those which would struggle for the defence of women’s rights. The province of La Pampa has not been exempt from this fenomenon. In a period of more than three decades flourished in the pampean social scenery several movements. Nontheless, it is about the end of the 20th century that many other emerged, whose objectives are clearly feminist, and they are bound to the express defence of women’s rights. This is the case of Movement for Women’s Rights of General Pico”, subject of study in this paper. Adopting a regional perspective, from a gender viewpoint, this research is powered by the following questionings: Did the constitution of this movement implied a resignification and reconstruction of both, individual and collective identities of its members? In what sense? In which context do they decide to group? Which were, a still are their aims? Which lines of action do they have? Have they achieved any goals? Which ones? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]