Best strategies to advance the
global struggle against femicide
Diana E. H. Russell
ABSTRACT
Dr. Russell's article, "Best
Strategies to Advance the Global Struggle Against Femicide," is a
considerably revised and much lengthier version of her concluding speech at the
U.N. Symposium on Femicide in Vienna, Austria, in November 2012. After
describing her efforts to disseminate the term femicide in the U.S. from 1976
onwards, Dr. Russell revisits the controversial issue re: her and others'
definitions of femicide. She also includes the U.N. Report about the speakers'
contributions at the Symposium and the revised version of the "Vienna
Declaration" to be presented to the General Assembly of the U.N. in the
future. Finally, Dr. Russell recommends
several strategies to accelerate the struggle against femicide.
Keywords: United Nations; femicide;
feminicide; femicidio; feminicidio; definition; homicide; depoliticize;
international; global; strategies; symposium; Vienna; female genocide;
feticide; testimony; Latin America
"All women are at risk of
femicide."Jacqueline Campbell, Ph.D.
Introduction
I was invited by the organizers of
the United Nations Symposium on Femicide in Vienna, Austria, to conclude this
one-day international policy-oriented meeting by proposing what I believed to
be the best strategies to advance the global struggle against femicide. I was also asked to describe the major
challenges that I had personally encountered in my efforts to raise public
awareness about femicides after I had introduced this term at the International
Tribunal on Crimes Against Women in 1976 -- nearly four decades ago (Russell
and Van de Ven, 1976). [i]
Because we speakers had to confine
ourselves to about ten minutes for our presentations, I relish this opportunity
to be able to provide some highlights of other speakers' contributions, as well
as the vital document titled "The Vienna Declaration" that had to be
finalized by the conclusion of the Symposium.
I also decided to revisit what has become the controversial issue of the
definitions of femicide, femicidio, feminicide and feminicidio.
When trying to revolutionize
feminist consciousness in the United States -- as I did together with several
other feminists when we co-founded WAVPM (Women Against Violence in Pornography
and Media) in 1976 -- I believe the best strategy is to focus on convincing the
women's movement that, say, pornography or femicide, or whatever, is an
important but neglected feminist issue.
However, I soon discovered that this was an exceedingly difficult task
with the issue of woman killing, despite its prevalence in the United States.
Although it is commonly recognized
in the U.S., including law, that some murders of African Americans, Latinos,
Asian Americans, Native Americans, and other people of color -- are racist,
that some murders of Jews are anti-Semitic, and that some murders of lesbians
and gay men are homophobic, the fact that much larger numbers of murders of
women and girls are motivated in whole or in part by males' misogynistic attitudes
to females continues to be largely ignored -- even by feminists engaged in
combating violence against women.
Since 1976, I have engaged in many
different strategies in the hope that one or other of them would inspire
feminists in the United States to adopt this term instead of using the
gender-neutral terms -- murder or homicide.
These strategies have included public speeches about femicide,
appearances on TV and radio, numerous interviews by journalists, and publishing
two books and many articles on femicide.
Although the organizers of the
United Nations Symposium on Femicide only requested that I describe my own
efforts to disseminate the term femicide, and to urge activists to fight
against this most extreme form of violence against women, space now permits me
to include three anti-femicide projects organized by others in the United
States.
Radical feminist activist Chris
Domingo founded a Clearinghouse on Femicide in 1989 in Berkeley, California,
where I also live. She described it as
involving a loose collective of women who engaged in research, education, and
protests against femicide. They also
published a quarterly newsletter titled "Memory and Rage" (Domingo,
1992, p. 368). Domingo worked tirelessly
for years to create an extensive computer bank and archive on femicide. She also distributed research materials on
femicide to interested individuals, organizations, and the media, and answered
hundreds of letters about femicide that she received from all over the United
States and internationally. The
Clearinghouse collective also coordinated a support network for women who had
lost one or more family members or friends to femicide. [ii]
The Black Coalition Fighting Back
Serial Murders was founded in 1986 "out of concern for the many unsolved
serial femicides of mainly black women occurring in south central Los Angeles,
California" (Domingo, 1992: 367).
Four years later, the Clothesline
Project was started in 1990. It was
"run by a coalition of women who invited others to make shirts for
clotheslines in more than a dozen states in memory of women who have been
victimized by violence, including ... femicide" (Domingo, 1992: 368).
Domingo and I compiled a list of several other anti-femicide organizations in
the United States, and described their actions. Radford and Russell's anthology
(Domingo, 1992: 367-369)
Revisiting the Seminar on Femicide
in Juarez in 2004, and the Femicide vs. Feminicide/Feminicidio Controversy.
I was surprised and delighted to be
invited to speak at the Seminar on Femicide organized by Marcela Lagarde in
Juarez -- the femicide capital of Mexico -- on December 4, 2004.
Even though I realized that my
inability to speak or understand Spanish would be a significant handicap to
what I would learn, nothing could have kept me away from this seminars. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the rare experience
of being treated like a queen on this very special occasion.
I was also greatly impressed by the
large number of active participants (28) seated around tables arranged in
horseshoe formation as well as the
audience of about fifty women who attended.
Seminario
Internacional: feminicidio, justicia y derecho
After Lagarde had opened the
seminar, she went on to declare:
"Sometimes a book changes
history, and Dr. Russell and Jill Radford's book, Femicide: The Politics of
Woman Killing, is such a book!"
Femicide: The Politics of Woman
Killing.
What an unexpected thrill it was for
me to hear these words after 28 years of my mostly failed efforts to persuade
the women's liberation movement in the U.S. to adopt the term femicide,
including the organizations dedicated to combatting violence against women.
Lagarde described how reading
"Femicide: The Politics of Woman Killing (1992)" had revolutionized
her thinking about the epidemic of brutal, rape-torture-mutilation-femicides
that had occurring for many years in Juarez.
She also related that this book had inspired her to organize the
seminar, with the intention of launching a campaign with other Mexican
feminists against these vicious misogynist crimes. In addition, Lagarde castigated the routine
failure of the police in Juarez to apprehend the perpetrators of these brutal
femicides.
Too, the male-dominated Mexican
Government appeared to be totally indifferent to these lethal acts against
women and teenaged girls.
After the seminar on femicide had
ended, Lagarde asked for my permission to translate femicide into the more
Spanish-sounding terms feminicide or feminicidio. As may be seen in Photo above, the banner
above the Seminar participants reveals that Lagarde was already using the term
feminicidio.
Naturally, I consented to Lagarde's
request. At that time, her definition of
feminicide remained very similar to my and Radford's definition, although she
excluded juveniles and children as victims or perpetrators, i.e., her
definition referred to the killing of women (not females) by men (not males)
becausethey are women (not female).
Since I already noted Lagarde's
redefinition of what she had originally described as a mere translation of
femicide in my article "Defining Femicide," it won't be repeated
here. Some time later, however, Lagarde claimed
that she had coined her revised terms (Cabrera, 2010, p. 18). But if redefining a term qualified as coining
it, this could culminate in numerous individuals claiming to have coined it
simply by making additional changes to the definition.
Furthermore, Julia Fragoso Monarrez,
a professor and researcher in Juarez, Mexico, published an article on
"feminicidio" as early as 1999 (1999). She subsequently published numerous other
articles, in all of which she used this term (see references in Fregoso and
Bejarano, 2010, pp. 353-354). In
addition, Ana Carcedo and Montserrat Sagot's book, Femicidio en Costa Rica,
1990-1999, based on their empirical study of femicides in their country during
the 1990s, was published in 2000. This
is two years before the Seminar on Femicidio that Lagarde organized in December
2004.
Monarrez's publications provide
irrefutable evidence that even if it were legitimate for Lagarde to claim that
her redefinition of femicide qualifies as coining the term (which it is not),
Monarrez used the term feminicidio many years before she did. In short, the claims of Lagarde and others
that Lagarde coined the term feminicidio is false.
Lagarde's Attempt to Depoliticize
the Term Femicide and Render it Meaningless
In Lagarde's preface to Fregoso and
Bejarano's anthology (2010), she appears to be attempting to discredit the term
femicide by depoliticizing it and redefining it as homicide! Following are three paragraphs from her
preface, and my comments:
“The category and theory of
feminicide emerges from feminist theory through the works of Diana Russell and
Jill Radford. I based my own analysis on
their theoretical and empirical work as elaborated in their volume Femicide:
The Politics of Woman Killing(1992). The
translation for femicide is femicidio.
However, I translated femicide as feminicidio, and this is how it has
circulated. In Spanish, femicidiois
homologous [corresponds] to homicide and solely means the homicide of women.”(
Lagarde, 2010)
After saying that femicidio was her
Spanish translation of femicide, but that she had found herself using the term
feminicidio instead (by accident?), then maintains that "femicidio means
solely the homicide of women" (Lagarde, 2010:. xv. My emphasis).
Hence she takes the outrageous liberty of redefining as homicidewhat she
had also claimed to be the Spanish translation of my and Radford's term
femicide -- as if we hadn't defined the term femicide in order to differentiate
homicide and femicide.
Then states:
“For this reason, I preferred
feminicidio in order to differentiate from femicidio and to name the ensemble
of violations of women's human rights, which contain the crimes against and the
disappearances of women. I proposed that
all these be considered as 'crimes against humanity.' Feminicide is genocide against women, and it
occurs when the historical conditions generate social practices that allow for
violent attempts against the integrity, health, liberties, and lives of girls
and women.” (Lagarde,2010: xv-xvi).
I completely disagree with Lagarde's
equation of feminicide and genocide.
Femicide can apply to one man killing his wife, as well as mass
femicides, such as those occurring in the Congo. To maintain that, for example, so-called "honor"
femicides constitute genocide is a serious misuse of the term genocide.
“Feminicide is able to occur because
the authorities who are omissive (sic), negligent, or acting in collusion with
the assailants perpetrate institutional violence against women by blocking
their access to justice and thereby contributing to impunity.[ ...] Feminicide
is a state crime.” (idem: xxiii)
Although I agree with Lagarde that
gigantic numbers of femicides occur because patriarchal authorities at every
level are negligent about femicides, and often collude with the perpetrators, I
don't consider that the blocking of women's access to justice is the only, or
the major factor in the occurrence of femicides. Nor do I agree with Lagarde's statement that
femicides are state crimes.]
Lagarde states elsewhere that,
Femicidal violence
“[...] is made up of the whole set
of misogynistic forms of conduct -- mistreatment and physical, psychological,
sexual, educational, economic, property-related, family, community, institutional
violence -- that entail social impunity and impunity by the state, and, on
placing women at risk and in a defenseless position, may culminate in homicide
or attempted homicide -- that is, in feminicide and in other forms of violent
death of girls and women, specifically death due to accidents and suicide and
preventable deaths stemming from lack of security, neglect, and exclusion from
development and democracy.” (idem: xxiv)
Lagarde's claim that femicides
include "[…] mistreatment and
physical, psychological, sexual, educational, economic, property-related,
family, community, institutional violence" regarding which social impunity
and impunity by the state [... ] may culminate [...] in feminicide and in other
forms of violent death of girls and women[ ....] is ludicrous. For a start, acts that may culminate in
femicide don't qualify as femicide unless they do culminate in femicide.
Furthermore, what could Lagarde have
in mind when she refers to "educational violence," that may culminate […] in feminicide [
…]."? Even more inexplicable is her
statement equating feminicide with homicide or attempted homicide, i.e.,
"Femicidal violence … is made up of the whole set of misogynistic forms of
conduct" including "mistreatment …. institutional violence … that …
may culminate in homicide or attempted homicide -- that is, in feminicide
…."
First, here Lagarde treats
feminicide as synonymous with homicide and attempted homicide -- despite the
fact that this undermines the whole point of differentiating femicide or
feminicide and homicide. In addition,
how can attempted homicides be the same as femicide?
Secondly, to maintain that femicide
includes mistreatment doesn't meet Lagarde's or anyone else's definition of
femicide. The same applies to every
other factor that she mentions as misogynist forms of conduct.
Thirdly, Lagarde refers here to
feminicide and other forms of violent deaths of girls or women, specifically
those due to accidents and suicide and preventable deaths stemming from lack of
security, neglect, and exclusion from development and democracy. Since the issue is femicide, why does Lagarde
concern herself with "other forms of violent death of girls and
women?" (idem:. xxiv).
The United Nations Definition of
Femicide
In contrast to my final definition
of femicide -- the killing of females by males becausethey are female -- the
United Nations kept their original definition of femicide as "the killing
of a woman, because she is a woman."
Following are three of the shortcomings of this definition in my view:
1. It excludes the millions of
female babies, young girls, and teenaged girls;
2. It conveys that femicide is a
one-on-one crime, rather than that many femicides are perpetrated by more than
one male, e.g., gangs of males, armies of males, and millions of fathers who
kill their wives for not bearing sons;
3. It includes female perpetrators
of femicide despite the fact that in many such cases the women are coerced by
men into implementing such acts, or they are subjected to other negative
sanctions by men, including femicidal threats common in India as when mothers
of girl babies refuse to kill them.
Report on the United Nations
Symposium on Femicide
Because a relatively small group of
women and men were present at the UN Symposium on Femicide, I will include a
slightly edited version of this informative report about these lethal
misogynist crimes so that readers will have the opportunity to share this
groundbreaking event. I believe that
this meeting will prove to be a turning point in the dissemination of the term
femicide, and accelerate it's adoption internationally. This is of vital importance because it
politicizes the killing of women and girls globally, as the adoption of the
term "sexual harassment" politicized the widespread sexist male
practice towards women in work places, educational institutions, the military,
religious institutions, and wherever males and females are in the same
locations.
This report will also identify most
of the individuals who spoke at the Symposium, combined with brief descriptions
of what they said.
On the occasion of the International
Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, the Vienna Liaison Office of
the Academic Council on United Nations System (ACUNS) honored the victims of
femicides by organizing a one-day symposium on fighting femicide. This
symposium could not have taken place without the support of the Austrian
Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs; the Permanent Missions
to the UN Office at Vienna of Austria, Argentina, Philippines, Thailand, and
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; Small Arms Survey;
and the Vienna NGO Committee on the Status of Women. State representatives,
social scientists, NGO representatives, statisticians, lawyers and feminist
activists had the opportunity to speak about femicide, explain its meaning and
causes, but also presented examples of best practice in fighting femicide.
Her Royal Highness Princess
Bajrakitiyabha Mahidol of Thailand opened the picture exhibition, comprising
photographs from Jodi Bieber, Paula Bronstein, Lisette Lemus, Walter Astrada,
Diane Kahlo, and photographs from the exhibition "Visions of hope",
illustrating the different forms of femicide.
What is Femicide?
As mentioned in my article on
"Defining Femicide," the United Nations retained their original
definition of femicide as the killing of a woman, because she is a woman.
These crimes [femicides] are
systematic and female victims are often murdered in a very brutal way. For a
case to be considered femicide there must be an implied intention to carry out
the crime and a demonstrated connection between the crime and the gender of the
victim. Femicides occur every day and in every country in the world.
Furthermore, women being murdered come from all kindsof cultural and social
backgrounds.
Femicide comprises, among others,
the murder of women as a result of intimate partner violence, the torture and
misogynist slaying of women, the killing of women and girls in the name of
"honour", the targeted killing of women and girls in the context of
armed conflict, dowry-related killings of women, the killing of women and girls
because of their sexual orientation and gender identity, female infanticide and
gender-based sex selection foeticide, genital mutilation related femicide and
other femicides connected with gangs, organized crime, human trafficking, and
the proliferation of small arms. [iii]According to Prof. Diana Russell, who has
dedicated her life to fighting femicide, sexism and misogyny are the main
causes for the intentional killing of women. [iv]
Michelle Bachelet is currently the
first Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director of UN Women. She was the President of Chile from
2006-2010. She is a feminist and a
long-time champion of women's rights.
She opened the UN symposium with a video message in which she expressed
her support for this endeavor. UN Women
recently intensified their efforts to tackle the issue of femicide and to work
closely with Special Rapporteur Rashida Manjoo.
Michelle Bachelet opens the
symposium with a video in which she denounces femicide.]
The Austrian Federal Minister for
Women and the Civil Service Gabriele Heinisch-Hosek reminded the audience that
violence against women is also a reality in Austria and that unless there is no
real equality between men and women, violence against women will prevail.
The Deputy Executive Director of the
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Sandeep Chawla, referred in
his opening remarks to the UNODC Global Study on Homicide (2011). One of the
findings of the report was that the home, which is supposed to be a safe haven,
has now become the most dangerous place for women and girls. Indeed, in the
European Union 70% of femicides result from intimate partner violence, i.e.
that the woman was killed by her partner or former partner.
Furthermore, 1 out of 4 women have
experienced partner violence in their life and 7 women die every day as a
result of domestic violence. In the United Kingdom, about two women per week
are killed by their partner, and about 40% of the women murdered are victims of
domestic conflicts.
According to the Small Arms Survey
Report 2012, presented by the Research Director of Small Arms Survey, Dr. Anna
Alvazzi del Frate, studies have shown that guns inside the household, increase
the risk of domestic disputes ending with a fatal outcome. One third of female
victims of femicide were killed with firearms and many of them were previously
threatened with it.
The persons who commit femicides are
often men, but women can also be the offenders. This can be the case when
mothers kill their baby girls or intentionally abort their female foetus, when
mothers or mother-in-laws are involved in honour killings or when girls die as
a result of genital mutilation. [v]
However, many women commit these crimes because all their life they were
told that they are less valuable than men.
Mr. Sami Nevala, Team Coordinator
for Statistics and Surveys at the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
(FRA) and Ms. Angela Me, Chief Statistics and Surveys Section at the UNODC
explained the difficulties in gathering and evaluating data on femicide. Ms. Me
also mentioned that there is no such thing as 'global data on femicide' and
that it is easier and more common to measure education, health, and the state
of the economy. Although global studies on homicide contain chapters for women,
this is by far not enough.
Ms. Barbara Spinelli, Italian lawyer
specialized on gender issues and leading force of the Italian platform "30
years CEDAW-Work in progress", underlined that common indicators need to
be established in order to collect internationally comparable data. Ms.
Spinelli also insisted upon the states' due diligence obligation to protect
women as well as to prevent and prosecute femicide.
Barbara Spinelli, lawyer and author
of book on feminicide in Italy, on Professor Russell's left, during break in
symposium
Ms. Rita Banerji, who initiated the
"50 Million Missing Campaign" in India, stressed that femicide is a
human rightsviolation and that one of the main reasons why so many women are
still being killed around the globe is impunity.
Professor Diana Russell at speakers
table about to conclude UN symposium by recommending best anti-femicide
strategies
Best practices
As more and more countries have to
respond to the increasing systematic killing of women in their territory,
drawing attention to best practice examples during the symposium was of the
utmost importance.
Fortunately, many representatives of
the UN member states have shown their interest to (sic) the topic and attended
the symposium. H.E. Ambassador Susan le Jeune D'Allegeershecque, Permanent Representative
of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the United
Nations and other International Organisations in Vienna, not only attended the
symposium, but also shared best practices from the UK. For instance, in order
to increase the number of perpetrators who are brought to justice, a specialist
team of UK experts have come together to investigate and gather evidence.
These teams include, but are not
limited to police officers, lawyers, psychologists and forensic scientists.
Preventing femicides and offering protection to women victim of gender-based
violence in war situations is also a top priority for the United Kingdom.
H. E. Ambassador Dr. Christine
Stix-Hackl, Permanent Representative of Austria to the United Nations in
Vienna, mentioned the Council of Europe Convention on "feminicides"
which recognizes femicide as a global problem and will be useful in
establishing new standards. She indicated Austria's intention to sign the
Convention in 2013, at the same time encouraging other states to do the same.
H. E. Ambassador Lourdes O.
Yparraguirre, Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations
in Vienna, chaired the first session of the symposium and stressed again the
importance of international cooperation between states, especially in sharing
best practices.
Ms. Maria Isabel Vicandi Plaza,
Alternate Permanent Representative of Spain to the United Nations in Vienna,
underlined that femicide should not be recognized as a crime of passion and
that states must ensure the rights of women and fight violence against women.
She stressed the lack of legal
recognition of femicide in many countries and claimed that more investigation
is needed. Spain has been a role model in the European Union in terms of
successful awareness raising campaigns, but Latin American countries proved to
be way ahead of many countries in the world in terms of successful legislation
against femicide.
Ms. Francisca Pérez Cotapos, a penal
lawyer working for the Unit for the Prevention of Domestic Violence in Chile,
gave concrete examples of the positive developments in Chile. In 2010, Article
390 of the Penal Code was added to the Chile legislation and since then,
partners or former partners who murdered their female partner can be imprisoned
because they committed a crime of femicide. More importantly, femicide is now
not only part of the criminal law system, but also of the civil and family code
of law. Ms. Cotapos stressed that using the word "femicide" in the
legislation has made a crucial difference, as it distinguishes crimes against
women. (Emphasis mine.)
Since the introduction of this
article, the number of femicides in Chile has decreased. (Emphasis mine.) In
addition to legislation procedures, prevention and protection has been an
important priority in Chile as well. Campaigns criminalizing violence against
women and establishing special facilities for women, such as the 94 women's
centers and the 24 shelters, have also contributed to the decrease in
femicides. (Emphasis mine.) The
so-called "Cross-sector Protocol for Femicide Victims" also
guarantees protection to victims on a legal, social and psychological level.
Another important activity has been to educate men who battered their female
partner.
Dr. Ranjana Kumari, Director of the
Center for Social Research in India, reported several positive developments in
India. Since a law in 1984 made dowry
killing an offence of harassment and non-compoundable, there has been a
consisting (sic) growth in the reporting system. Before the law was passed,
police officers would tell the woman that the crime was her own fault. Under
the new law, the police are obliged to act on a complaint and specific centers
have been created for these complaints. A possible punishment for this crime,
if it involves death, is life imprisonment. Judgment can, however, take up to nine
years.
Female selection/sex-based selection
is another major issue, not only in India but all over Asia. New technology
that can detect the sex of the child before the birth has lead to numerous
abortions of girls. Now, India has a good framework of law, but religion,
society and tradition can be problematic. Although punishment for this crime is
severe, not many cases have been brought to court.
Dr. Ranjana Kumari spoke about the
massive problem of femicide in India due to preference for male children. Ms. Ilona Graenitz, Chairperson of the Vienna
NGO Committee on the Status of Women, also stressed the importance of involving
civil society, particularly more women's organizations.
Finally, Prof. Diana Russell
recommended international Tribunals on Femicide to be organized as a strategy
to raise awareness about this lethal misogynist crime, as well as inspiring
protests and new laws to combat femicide.
[vi]Professor Russell also stressed that very large scale mass femicides
should be considered a form of genocide and that gender should be added to the
Genocide Convention.
Ways Forward
The speakers of [at] the symposium
all agreed on one essential point: there is an institutional lack of awareness
and political will to address the structural causes of femicide. The state's
obligation should be to prevent violence against women, protect victims of
gender-based violence and provide adequate investigation and prosecution.
Furthermore, it is of the utmost importance that specific legislation targets
gender-based killings.
Article 4 (c and d) of the UN
Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women does require States to
"exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate and in accordance with
national legislation punish acts of violence against women whether those
actions are perpetrated by the State or private persons." But, until now,
the political will has not been strong enough for governments to fulfill these
obligations.
Dr. Eduardo Vetere, former Head of
the UN Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, presented the Vienna
Declaration on Femicide, a document that urges not only UN member states, but
also UN organizations and civil society to join forces and take responsibility
to put an end to femicide. The declaration was signed by the participants of
the symposium as well as by Austria, Slovenia, the Philippines and Norway.
ACUNS Vienna intends to bring the
issue of femicide, together with the supporting states and partners of the
symposium, to the 57th session of the Commission on the Status of Women which
will take place in New York from 4-15 March 2013 and will focus on the
elimination and prevention of all forms of violence against women and girls.
The Vienna Declaration on Femicide
I was elated when I first read an
earlier draft of the Vienna Declaration on Femicide. This document was to be finalized by the end
of the Symposium and signed by the participants. Next, it would be presented to the United
Nations General Assembly in April 2013, if a representative of a member state
would agree to play this role.
Unfortunately, no such representative volunteered to do so; hopefully
the Vienna Declaration on Femicide will therefore be presented for a vote at
the UN General Assembly in April 2014.
Following is a copy of this document
in which four paragraphs are excluded because they don't relate to femicide.
We, the participants of the Vienna
Symposium on Femicide, held on 26 November 2012 at the United Nations Office at
Vienna,
Alarmed by the fact that femicide is
increasing all over the world and often remains unpunished, which not only
intensifies the subordination and powerlessness of women and girls, but also
sends the negative message to society that violence against females may be both
acceptable and inevitable,
Recognizing that femicide is the
killing of women and girls because of their gender, which can take the form of,
inter alia:
1) the murder of women as result of
intimate partner violence;
2) the torture and misogynist
slaying of women;
3) killing of women and girls in the
name of "honour";
4) targeted killing of women and
girls in the context of armed conflict;
5) dowry-related killings of women;
6) killing of women and girls
because of their sexual orientation and gender identity;
7) the killing of aboriginal and
indigenous women and girls because of their gender;
8) female infanticide and
gender-based sex selection foeticide;
9) genital mutilation related
femicide;
10) accusations of witchcraft, and
11) other femicides connected with
gangs, organized crime, drug dealers, human trafficking, and the proliferation
of small arms.
Emphasizing that traditions and
culture cannot be used as justifications for the violation of women's human
rights, in particular the right to life and the right to be free from violence,
Recognizing that femicide requires
efforts on all levels of society to achieve its eradication,
Reaffirming the commitment to work
together towards putting an end to femicide, in full compliance with national
and international legal instruments,
1. Urge Member States to consider
adopting and implementing legislation to criminalize (investigate, prosecute,
punish and redress) femicide, in line with the effective experience of some
countries, and to undertake institutional initiatives to improve the prevention
of femicide and the provision of legal protection, remedies and reparation to
women survivors or violence against women, as highlighted or codified in international
laws,
2. Call upon Member States to
design, implement and evaluate comprehensive strategies and programmes aimed at
reducing the vulnerabilities of women and girls to femicide, including public
education programmes and interventions aimed at empowering women and girls and
promote a culture of respect without any form of discrimination, as well as to
conduct research on the role of gender-related causes (or motives) of femicide,
including misogyny, to inform the above-mentioned strategies and programmes,
3. Urge Member States to support the
introduction of a goal on ending violence against women in the post-2015
development agenda with a specific target of reducing by half the number of
femicides by 2025,
4. Invite the United Nations Office
on Drugs and Crime, the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and
Empowerment of Women (UN Women), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights, the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Population
Fund and other relevant United Nations agencies and programmes to assist and
support Member States in developing and adapting measures and strategies to
prevent and respond to femicide as a grave and unacceptable violation of
women's and girls' most basic human right to life,
5. Encourage the United Nations
Office on Drugs and Crime, UN Women, and other relevant United Nations
entities, the institutes of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice Programme Network, and research institutions to conduct relevant
research on femicide, including in particular data collection, analysis,
evaluation of programs set up to combat femicide, and the role of policies to
facilitate efforts to eradicate femicide,
6. Recognize the indispensable work
of civil society organizations in fighting femicide worldwide and encouraging
Member States and donors to support and finance their efforts,
7. Invite the UNODC to identify
relevant civil society organizations and facilitate Member States' cooperation
with civil society organizations in order to create synergies and make use of
all available resources to design, implement, and evaluate programs to end
femicide
The Significance of the Vienna
Declaration
I was extremely gratified that this
United Nations document urged all Member States to recognize that femicides are
escalating all over the world, and that these lethal sexist crimes often remain
unpunished. I also commended those who
revised the Declaration for urging Member States to work together in their
efforts to combat all forms of femicide.
I particularly appreciated the
Declaration's emphasis that traditions and culture must not be permitted to
justify femicides. For example, consider
so-called "honor" femicides that are routinely defended by the
perpetrators as justifiable acts to protect the honor of their families. Some of these femicides are perpetrated by
male family members on the basis of false rumors, errors, or lies, such as that
a daughter, sister or mother was seen with another man. Some honor femicides are perpetrated by
fathers of sons who raped their sisters.
For women to be killed on such outrageously misogynist grounds by their
nearest and dearest in the name of honor, strikes me as one of the most heinous
forms of femicide.
Honor femicides are typically
condoned by other males imbedded in the patriarchal power structure and
institutions of countries in which they occur.
Most of the perpetrators receive only minor raps on their knuckles for
these lethal crimes. Pakistan is the
country with the highest prevalence of honor femicides. [vii]
Finally, the Vienna Declaration
provides guidance to Member Nations by recommending many steps that they must
take to combat the long neglected problem of femicide.
Strategies I Recommend to Combat
Femicide Globally
Recognizing the reality and scope of
femicides in every country is the first step to revolutionizing awareness about
the incalculable costs of these lethal manifestations of misogyny.
The naming and defining of newly
recognized forms of women's oppression is essential before they can be
satisfactorily analyzed and/or attempts made to combat or prevent them. The naming of sexual harassment, for example,
was a vital first step towards the creation of legislation to prosecute such
offenses. Therefore, in countries and
communities where the term femicide is not yet known, it is important that
efforts are made to disseminate it as rapidly as possible.
I believe that the most important
strategies to combat femicide involve the eradication of all forms of sexist
discrimination, misogynist attitudes and policies, and all manifestations of
male dominance. This is exactly what
feminist movements strive to do. Others
must join this challenging effort.
Dr. Russell addressing meeting of
international experts on femicide in Washington DC, April 2008, to discuss
strategies for combating femicide.]
Four of the experts on femicide,
from left to right, 1) Shanaaz Mathews from South Africa, 2) Jordanian author
of book on honor crimes, and on far right 4) Ana Caredo, Costa Rican co-author
of first book on femicide in Latin America.
Because of the male preference bias,
millions of other females are missing in Pakistan, South Korea, Taiwan,
Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and several other countries. I believe that the most effective single
strategy that would advance the global struggle against femicide would be for
the Convention on Genocide adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in
1948 to be amended by adding the term "gender" to the four other
factors currently included in the definition of genocide: that is, "any of
the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a
national, ethnical (sic), racial or religious group."
I'm convinced that including the
term "gender" in an amendment to the United Nations Convention on
Genocide would be extremely effective in bringing global attention to the many
millions of gender-based femicides that some individuals have recently
conceptualized as a war on women and girls perpetrated by males. (My
emphasis.)
If this proposal -- which I adopted
after feminist scholar and activist Banerji brought it to my attention -- were
implemented, the genocide of females would likely be the most massive of all
genocides ever perpetrated. I believe
that this new recognition would have a major impact on the development of
international policies to combat these gender-based genocides.
Feticide and Femicide
On realizing that millions of female
fetuses are aborted in India and China because of male preference, I initially
believed that female feticides should be differentiated from femicides. Note that Banerji also does not include
feticides in her list of the six most prevalent forms of femicide in
India. Then I learned from Catharine
MacKinnon that she and her colleagues had established "that sex-selective
abortions violate equality based on sex in India," so the "law
against sex-selective abortions stands" in that country (personal email
communication, November 6, 2012).
I was also convinced by MacKinnon
argument that, "if you can't even be born because of the sex that you
are," and when only female fetuses are eliminated by the millions because they
are female -- not because they are fetuses, then "femicide is being
engaged in, not feticide" (personal email communication, November 6,
2012).
Global UN Campaigns
I also proposed that the United
Nations select a particular example of femicide annually, and mount a massive
campaign to combat it. I'd like to see
femicides due to male-child reference selected for the first campaign. I presume that the growing opposition to
these policies, and their disastrous consequences, would be greatly
strengthened by being conceptualized as a gender-based genocide.
Anti-Femicide Laws
Since feminists in numerous
countries in Latin America have been so successful in mobilizing women to fight
against femicide, close examination of the strategies that have been used there
would likely provide many excellent ideas about best practices in combating
these misogynist crimes.
After the Seminar on Femicide in
Juarez in 2004, Lagarde and other concerned Mexican women protested against the
shockingly high prevalence of these terroristic female-hating crimes, as well
as the sexist impunity with which the police and the patriarchal government
responded to femicides. The impact of
naming as femicides these lethal male crimes likely contributed to Lagarde and
her colleagues' success in pressing the Mexican Government to pass a law
against femicide.
By the time that the United Nations'
Symposium occurred, the terms femicide, feminicide, femicidio, feminicidio, had
been widely adopted by feminists in many Latin American countries, aside from
Mexico, including Guatemala, Costa Rica, Bolivia, Chile, El Salvador, Brazil,
Uruguay, Peru, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Argentina. In addition, feminist anti-femicide
organizations had been set up in several of these countries, eight of which had
succeeded in getting their governments to pass laws against femicide.
Personal Testimony
Personal testimony has long been one
of the major feminist strategies to raise women's awareness about their own
oppression, as well as an effective method of increasing public awareness about
particular forms of sexist oppression and exploitation. It can also be very successful at motivating
feminists to engage in actions to combat femicides.
Because of the great impact of the
International Tribunal on Crimes Against Women in 1976, I became even more impressed by the efficacy
of personal testimony as a powerful strategy to combat whatever form(s) of women's
oppression the testimony was about.
Because of the lethality of femicides, personal testimonies about these
crimes would have to be contributed by members of victims' families, friends,
journalists, researchers, anyone with intimate knowledge about these cases, or
by the survivors of attempted femicides.
I have quite often recommended the
organization of International Tribunals on Femicide, especially in Latin
America, when I delivered speeches there on these hate crimes against
females. I made a particular effort to
convince Marcela Lagarde about my conviction in the potential efficacy of an
International Tribunal on femicide in Latin America, but unfortunately, I
failed in my mission.
I also advocate local and national
Tribunals on whatever femicides most concern women living in different
countries, regions, or local communities, for example, so-called honor crimes,
female sexual slavery and trafficking in girls and women, intimate partner
femicides, femicide by stoning, pornography-related femicides, serial femicides,
rape-femicides, femicidal victimization of prostituted women and girls, racist
femicides; homophobic femicides; and AIDS-related femicides (see Russell's
argument that AIDS is a form of mass femicide; Russell and Harmes, 2001, pp.
100-111).
A powerful example of the efficacy
of personal testimony was demonstrated by four British women survivors of
vicious attacks by their husbands who testified at the International Tribunal
in Brussels in 1976. Because Britain was
the first country in which feminists initiated a campaign against woman
battering, as well as inventing battered women's shelters to which survivors
could escape. The women also benefited
from the support and understanding that they needed at these safe havens.
The British International Tribunal
committee selected four battered women to testify at this groundbreaking
event. These women had recovered
sufficiently from their post traumatic stress disorders from which they had
suffered, to become filled with rage at their batterers. They felt no compunction about describing all
the vile details of their abuse, as well as how they had managed to escape to a
battered women's shelter. Finally they
shared how they had developed a political understanding of the abuse they had
suffered, and stopped blaming themselves for their victimization. In short, they became survivors. Among other consequences of the testimonies of
these four women was the opening of battered women's shelters all over Germany.
In the course of writing this
article, I discovered the enormous increase in all kinds of materials on
femicide on the internet since I had last searched the Internet for this
subject matter. This has convinced me that
the naming of femicide to politicize the killing of women and girls all over
the world, and the mobilization of women and progressive men to develop
multiple strategies to combat these misogynist male-perpetrated crimes, has
become unstoppable.
Bibliography
Books
Carcedo, Ana, and Sagot,
Montserrat. 2000. Femicidio en Costa Rica, 1990-1999. Femicidio
en Costa Rica, 1990-1999. San Jose,
Costa Rica: Organización Panamericana de la Salud.
Fregno,
Rosa-Linda, and Bejarano, Cynthia. (Eds.) 2010.
Terrorizing Women: Feminicide in the Americas.
Radford, Jill, and Russell, Diana E.
H. (Eds.). 1992. Femicide: The Politics of Woman Killing. New York: Twayne Publishers.
Russell, Diana E. H. and Harmes,
Roberta. (Eds.) 2001.
Femicide in Global Perspective.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Russell,
Diana E. H., and Van de Ven, Nicole. 1976. Crimes Against Women: The Proceedings of the
International Tribunal. Milbrae,
California: Les Femmes.
Chapters, Introductions, Articles
Lagarde, Marcela. 2010.
Preface: Feminist keys for understanding Feminicide. In Fregno, Rosa-Linda, and Bejarano,
Cynthia. (Eds.) Terrorizing Women: Feminicide in the
Americas.
Monarrez
Fragoso, Julia. 1999. "La cultura del feminicidio en Ciudad
Juarez. 1993-1999." Frontera Norte, Vol. 12, n. 23.
Electronic Text
Munoz Cabrera, Pamela. 2010.
Intersecting Violences: A review of feminist theories and debates on
violence against women and poverty in Latin America (Central American Women's Network,
[CAWN]).
Selected Actions
Domingo, Chris, and Russsell, Diana
E. H. 1992. Clearinghouse on Femicide. Berkeley, California. Listed in "Organizations," Radford
Domingo, Chris, and Russsell, Diana
E. H. 1992. The Black Coalition Fighting Back Serial
Murders. Listed in "Organizations,"
Domingo, Chris, and Russsell, Diana
E. H. 1992 .The Clothesline Project.
.
Domingo, Chris, and RusselI, Diana
E. H. 1992. Compiled a list of anti-femicide organizations in the United States. In Radford, Jill, and Russell, Diana E.
H. Femicide: The Politics of Woman
Killing.
Personal Communications
MacKinnon, Catharine. November 6, 2012. Email communication.
BIOGRAPHY
Diana E. H. Russell, Ph.D., a
Professor Emerita of Sociology, is one of the foremost experts on sexual
violence against women and girls in the world. For the last 40 years she has
been deeply engaged in research and activism on this massive social problem.
She has authored, co-authored, edited, and/or co-edited 17 books, mostly on
sexual violence, which have become authoritative sources on rape (including
wife rape), incestuous abuse, femicide, and pornography. Dr. Russell was
co-recipient of the prestigious C. Wright Mills Award for The Secret Trauma for
outstanding social science research. Check out her website at
www.dianarussell.com
Footnotes
.[i]This book is still printed by
Russell Publications, 2432 Grant Street, Berkeley, CA 94703, USA. A copy is also on Russell's website at
www.dianarussell.com, that can be downloaded.
[ii] The large file cabinet of
Femicide Clearinghouse materials that the late Domingo had collected and
organized, is stored in my garage awaiting a feminist activist who is
interested in using the materials and able to house them in the San Francisco
Bay area.
[iii] I don't understand the
rationale for this example being limited to small arms
[iv] I have certainly not limited my
research and activism to this one crime.
[v]
See my article "Defining Femicide" for my disagreement with
statements in this paragraph.
[vi] This is the only paragraph that
I edited.
[vii] 943 honor killings were reported in 2011 in
Pakistan, and 5,000 internationally per year (Source:
http:/honour-killings.com/statistics-data/