Silvia Juárez: "We are going backwards 60 years in sex education in El Salvador"
Interview with Silvia Juárez, from the Women for Peace organization, about the government's alliances with churches.
Share
Silvia Juárez is part of the Organization of Women for Peace (ORMUSA), and in this interview, she explains how the relationship between the Salvadoran state and religious structures undermines the development of women's sexual and reproductive rights, as well as the rights of the LGBTIQ+ population. This is reflected in the closure of government programs addressing violence and the budget cuts to programs like Ciudad Mujer since 2019.
Juárez agrees that women are the most affected because they are also shouldering the burden of work that should be the State's responsibility to guarantee the rights of Salvadoran women. She also believes that the new maternal and child health laws passed by the Legislative Assembly only recognize women in their reproductive role.
In June of this year, Alharaca published an investigation exploring how the marriage between the churches and the Nayib Bukele government had a devastating impact on women and the sexually diverse population.
– What is your opinion on the relationship between politics and religion?
The Church is a powerful structure. As a collective space that promotes a certain ideology, a certain way of thinking, it also has the ability to influence that thinking within a specific population. What we must understand is that when we talk about the Church, when there is intervention in the decisions of a country or a state that claims to be non-denominational, we are talking about a power structure, even a negotiating structure. And that is where it becomes most concerning because it is tied to a certain ideology. In the case of women, it promotes certain practices. For example: this idea of forgiveness, of enduring everything, the myths of romantic love. These practices are based on this religious framework. This is the foundation of one of the most frequently documented practices within the culture of violence.
– How do these religious sectors influence public policy?
El Salvador has a culture of rape that has triggered a recurring and repeated practice of revictimizing women, without this having prompted any alarm regarding religious ideas, mercy, or love of neighbor, nor has it served to work on behalf of the victims. On the contrary, we have seen how comprehensive sexuality and relationship education, for example, has been undermined. The most serious case for us is when an organization (the "Save the Family" Movement), which operates from a religious perspective, tells the State not to disseminate such basic information as human diversity and sexual identity. Or consider a series of comments on social media that have paralyzed comprehensive sex education in El Salvador, practically leading to its prohibition. We are regressing 60 years in sex education in El Salvador. This condemns children who experience sexual violence to remain silent and not recognize it. It condemns the victim to continue living with this violence, fostering impunity for the perpetrators.
In June 2022, the Legislative Assembly approved the Growing Together Law for the Comprehensive Protection of Early Childhood, Childhood, and Adolescence, with a last-minute modification. The legislation was passed one day after the "Save the Family" Movement, led by Regina Cardenal of the "Yes to Life" Foundation, asked the legislators to remove articles related to sexual and reproductive education.
– Do you think this influence of these church power structures is stronger in this government?
The Salvadoran state has been quite insensitive to women's needs, to equality. That's a point they have in common with these churches: insensitivity to women's needs. But I couldn't say for sure whether there are more or less of them than before. Many of the practices of the past are still present. Now it seems to me they're as blatant as this sign about the change of slogan in the Blue Room. In other words, what it's saying is: take note, this is our agenda.
On July 20, 2021, the Legislative Assembly amended the Law of National Symbols to incorporate a new inscription in the Blue Room, committee rooms, and other facilities of this branch of government. The religious inscription, “Our Faith Placed in God,” was proposed by the Speaker of the Assembly, Ernesto Castro, of the Nuevas Ideas party.
– Apart from setbacks in sexual and reproductive health, what other rights are women affected in?
– In the dismantling of health frameworks, for example, this "Born with Love" idea represents a step backward in terms of considering women solely in terms of their reproductive role. The promotion of women's health, for instance, as enshrined in the LEIV (Law on Comprehensive Care for Victims of Gender Violence) or the Equality Law, which recognized that women deserved healthcare simply by virtue of being women, was a step forward. This was accompanied by the practice of shutting down the issue and reducing the budget. This includes removing all of this from evidence-based analysis, for example, by denying access to data. Now, for instance, if we request access to data on maternal mortality or other causes of death, we are denied access. There has also been a complete dismantling of public policies addressing populations facing discrimination and vulnerability: women, LGBTQ+ individuals, and Indigenous peoples. Furthermore, there has been a clear setback in data-driven debates; for example, we no longer have an annual report on violence against women. The annual reports for 2021 and 2022 are not available because that will still prevent us from analyzing, for example, the conditions women experience within the healthcare system when facing sexual violence. These are clear setbacks.
– Regarding abortion: All the deputies from Nuevas Ideas and their allies have shown their rejection of abortion, some based on religious discourses, and have said that, in this Assembly, this issue will not be addressed.
– Because it didn't progress in the past. I'm not trying to defend it, but I want you to understand that it's a practice so deeply ingrained in our republican history that it's now so blatant, more cynical, if you will, open, where it's defined congruently with a political agenda that coincides with the agenda of a religious structure. It's not like we had abortion decriminalized in the past either.
In El Salvador, prior to 1998, abortion was permitted when the pregnancy resulted from rape or the fetus had malformations (therapeutic, ethical, and eugenic abortion). From that year onward, it was prohibited for all reasons. In October 2021, the current Legislative Assembly blocked a proposal to decriminalize abortion in three specific circumstances, citing religious reasons.
– But there were different positions that allowed for more room for debate.
Yes, there was a more diverse range of opinions that at least allowed for open debate. For me, we came close to opening a debate. These are problems that affect society, particularly more than half the population. It must be discussed based on scientific evidence, based on the real levels of impact on women's lives. Now the discourse is more homogeneous in that no one dares to express that dissent, that diversity, and therefore, we are going to be much further from a political commitment or decision like that, because we won't even be able to debate it, because everything has already been said. This alliance between the position of the Church and the position of the State, for the convenience of both, is going to cause a significant setback. We are no longer going to move from a polarization of those who were for or against, but rather a society that constantly rejects the other position, demonizing it or making it a taboo subject in the case of comprehensive sex education. That is not just paralysis, but a regression.
– How do these setbacks influence or impact the work done by women's organizations?
We are affected, of course, because fear takes hold first. There used to be some way to manage the conflict between what the State promoted and what the State was promoting. In schools, girls were taught that these are the body parts. They were taught about STIs (sexually transmitted infections). If I am religious or practice a faith, this creates a conflict for me, and there are decisions to be made about it. But when the State is outright saying, "This is prohibited because it's wrong," from that point on, there's no possibility of even, for example, in the minds of adults, adolescent boys, questioning sexuality and respect for women's bodies. That's where we lose out. First, if the State says it's wrong, it's wrong. And saying it's wrong can also have consequences.
– What are the consequences?
– There's a setback again. We're going back to taboos. And the other thing is, of course it affects us, because the public services the State doesn't provide are yet another task that has to be addressed by the communities. Besides being overweight, in terms of: if I don't have access to sexual and reproductive health services, the community can organize itself around that. All that the State isn't doing will fall on women's shoulders. For example, protecting girls from getting pregnant, because the State won't have health promoters providing counseling on sexual and reproductive health anymore. Again, a burden on women's agenda, and it distracts from other areas of development for women.
This interview was originally published in the Salvadoran media outlet Alharaca
Share
We are Present
We are committed to a type of journalism that delves deeply into the realm of the world and offers in-depth research, combined with new technologies and narrative formats. We want the protagonists, their stories, and their struggles to be present.
SUPPORT US
FOLLOW US
Related Notes
We Are Present
This and other stories don't usually make the media's attention. Together, we can make them known.