Defending women’s rights is defending democracy

In the last few decades, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of authoritarian governments. Autocracies now outnumber democracies and it is estimated that nearly three-fourths of the world’s population live under authoritarian rule.

Former US secretary of state Hillary R. Clinton is now professor of international and public affairs at Columbia University. She recently wrote: “… at the heart of the authoritarian wave: the persecution of women. Across cultures and continents, women champion democracy and tyrants target them as part of their playbook for amassing power. Failure to treat the repression of women as the crisis it is all but guarantees that democratic erosion will continue unchecked.”

She emphasized that attacks on women’s rights, opportunities and full participation in society have been ignored. This rapid democratic decay has deliberately led to dissent being criminalized and power is not being held accountable.

This targeting of women’s rights is due to the belief by authoritarian regimes that women’s participation in politics is both a catalyst for democracy and a bulwark against tyranny. This campaign against women’s rights and appeal to patriarchal “rights” leads to legitimizing authoritarian power.

The scholar Saskia Brechenmacher, senior fellow in Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict and Governance Program, wrote: “Given the importance of civic freedoms and political space to meaningful progress for women, strengthening democratic institutions will be an important element… Yet, focusing only on democracy while neglecting specific initiatives to improve gender equality would be misguided.”

There is therefore a deep connection between women’s rights and democracy. Autocrats know that women’s rights are still human rights.

Misogyny is defined as the hatred, contempt or deeply rooted prejudice against women and girls. Authoritarian regimes all over the world often have little else in common except a shared hostility to women’s rights. Autocrats often promote the message that any gain for women comes at men’s expense. This has become an answer to men frustrated by economic stagnation and unsettling cultural change. Misogyny has therefore become a political tool of authoritarianism.

Autocrats justify the repression of women as a way to defend “family values, cultural traditions and national identity.” According to Hillary Clinton, the most prominent practitioner and propagandist of this patriarchal approach to authoritarianism is Russian President Vladimir Putin. She writes: “He is the leader of an illiberal, misogynist, xenophobic international movement that wants to roll back women’s rights, expel migrants, democratic alliances and undermine the rules-based international order. He portrays women primarily as mothers and caregivers, not equal citizens, while undermining gender equality initiatives and fostering a culture of impunity by decriminalizing domestic violence.”

Even in countries that are considered as non-authoritarian, so-called strong leaders have used misogynistic practices in their relationship with women who are public figures. President Trump has publicly insulted female journalists and Rodrigo Duterte has a sense of humor that borders on misogynism.

When women’s rights are disrespected even in longstanding democracies, democratic norms begin to erode. The lesson that we should learn is that treating women’s rights as negotiable weakens democracy itself.

According to Clinton: “Repression of women is not just an ideological move to shore up authoritarian legitimacy. It’s also a practical playbook to weaken political opposition, undercut civil society and extend control. Regimes target female leaders and activists as part of a calculated strategy.”

The political scientist Mona Lena Krook has written: “Violence against women in politics is distinct and also troubling because it aims to exclude and disempower women as political actors. Excluding women from independent political influence has become a central tactic to weaken democratic checks and entrench control.”

Maria Ressa, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2021, has raised the alarm about the dangerous ways that are being used to weaponize different methods to silence and intimidate women, particularly journalists, youth organizers and democratic leaders. Ressa reported on the extrajudicial killings and corruption that were the hallmarks of Rodrigo Duterte’s administration during his six-year presidency in the Philippines. As a result, she faced relentless harassment, including racist and sexist online abuse, doxxing, death and rape threats and unfounded legal charges.

In her Nobel Peace Prize lecture in 2021, Ressa said that “women journalists are at the epicenter of risk.” Threats that women could once escape through physical exile can now be carried out virtually, spreading disinformation, intimidation and harassment across borders.

Clinton maintains that when women are silenced, democracy itself is weakened. There should be no delay in treating these attacks on women and the institutions and norms that sustain democratic governance.

Clinton writes: “Too often, democracy movements treat women’s rights as secondary. But history and evidence show that protecting women’s ability to participate in the public sphere is central to sustaining democracy… Defending women’s rights is defending democracy.”

The Philippines today has an abundance of female leaders. This should not lead to a misleading conclusion that women’s rights need not be defended in the Philippines. It is still necessary for women’s rights and power to be institutionalized among all social classes.