A year ago, women’s rights organisations were bracing themselves for a return of Donald Trump to office. The ensuing chaos was largely unforeseen. The torrent and swiftness of executive orders issued from the White House were regarded as a calculated strategy to paralyze through overload. To a large extent, it succeeded – there was bewilderment, fury, and fatigue as organisations scrambled to address the shortfall left by a abrupt cessation of financial support. But this was only the precursor.
The American government has been the primary force, complemented by vigorous campaigning by ultra-conservative groups exploiting the situation to strengthen global ties with sympathetic regimes.
Often termed the anti-gender movement describes a worldwide alliance of government figures, churches, and advocacy collectives as well as wealthy philanthropists and dynasties that work to dismantle advances on numerous fronts. This covers pro-choice policies, equality for sexual minorities, gender identity recognition, and inclusive relationship teaching.
They achieve this through advocating to officials, financing legal challenges, sabotaging multilateral work to foster equity, propagating misinformation, and bankrolling sympathetic charities.
We look at five instances that impacted the welfare, autonomy, and survival of females globally.
In March, shortly after a major US aid agency is suspended, causing global disruption, a top American diplomat confirms that nearly all of the agency’s programmes will be eliminated. US diplomats, ex-presidents and relief and public health authorities condemn the news, cautioning that people will die as a result. Rights defenders say that the closure of the organization is greater than a budgetary issue, it is a brutal assault on fundamental freedoms and birth control and maternal healthcare. Numerous groups say the impact on girls and women will be severe by waning support, especially in regions of instability. As the year ends, reports confirm how hundreds of thousands of people have already died from sickness, hunger, poor pregnancy healthcare, and abuse targeting females, with many more millions at risk. Another pair of leading funders follow with their own cuts. A head of a worldwide campaign network says a decision to slash billions in overseas assistance is a move to appease a political ally.
In March, several Christian-right organisations meet in an high-end hotel in NYC for a biannual gathering held alongside the international conference on women's rights. It is an forum to discuss methods on how to counter the UN's progressive policies. They are in high spirits as they welcome new Washington directives on gender, diversity and abortion. Meanwhile, the world's top diplomat opens the women’s summit with a somber alert that “the toxin of gendered hierarchy” is back, after a analysis demonstrates that anti-rights actors are actively undermining historic agreements on fundamental freedoms for women around the world.
Over the summer, a cluster of meetings in Africa centered on the traditional family and national sovereignty triggers anxiety among human rights defenders. In early May, a president and first lady open a large assembly to combat what they label criminal foreign forces eroding traditional family values. A soon after, another regional summit on traditional morals is held. Both events are participated in by leading US and European anti-rights figures, including leaders of well-known groups. One speaker calls on African NGOs to stand up to “international liberal agenda” of multilateral bodies. In the following month, a major religious institution hosts a event focused on reinforcing families in the region, an event that health activists say has become a forum for opposing queer and trans rights. Campaigners note that the level of external participation has expanded considerably.
As health facilities across Africa report they are facing shortages of birth control, including post-rape care packages, the US announces in midsummer plans to dispose of a vast stockpile of birth control held in a European depot. A global sexual health network states that their destruction will deny countless females from family planning options, and lead to a public health crisis of unwanted pregnancies. The organization labels the plan an politically-motivated move “about imposing an anti-rights agenda on the entire world” and “an intentional act of reproductive coercion”. A renowned doctors' group calls it “heartless and dangerous”. NGOs offer to buy the contraceptives so they can be distributed to those in need, but the US rejects each bid. The situation remains at a standstill as the regional government will not allow perfectly good supplies to be incinerated.
Reinstating the Mexico City Policy, which prohibits Washington's support for groups that provide, advocate for or advise on abortion services overseas, is commonplace under certain US administrations. It came as no surprise when the policy was restored in the first month of the year. The administration also signed onto a conservative consensus document. But in the autumn, the US announces it intends to extend the restrictions to include national governments and international bodies in addition to NGOs, and to cover diversity programmes. Further specifics about the broader enforcement are expected in early 2026. A director of a major health partnership says broadening the policy will have “unimaginable effects”. Advocates for bodily autonomy fear that fresh American assistance deals being discussed with African nations will become conditional on accepting the expanded global gag.