Skip to content
Share
Explore
Women's Month
Global State of Women’s Rights: Progress, Regressions, and Regional Trends
Introduction
Women’s rights worldwide have seen significant gains over the past decades, yet recent developments raise concerns about a possible backslide. No country in the world has achieved full gender equality, and many are falling behind on prior progress (). According to global indexes, nearly 40% of countries stagnated or even declined in gender equality between 2019 and 2022, with the number of countries where the situation for women deteriorated jumping from 10 to 17 in recent years (). This troubling trend – from the rollback of reproductive freedoms in some nations to resurgent patriarchal norms – has prompted analysts to ask: are we witnessing a regressive period for women’s rights?
() Women around the world continue to protest and advocate for their rights. Above, demonstrators in Manila march on International Women’s Day 2023, reflecting both progress and ongoing struggles in the global fight for gender equality () ().
Reproductive Rights
Access to contraception, safe abortion, and quality maternal healthcare is a cornerstone of women’s autonomy and well-being, and trends in these areas are mixed. On one hand, the long-term global trajectory on reproductive rights has been toward greater freedom. In the last 30 years, over 60 countries have liberalized their abortion laws, and all but four nations – the United States, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Poland – expanded the grounds on which women can legally obtain abortions (). Recent milestones include the “green wave” sweeping Latin America, where countries like Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico have legalized or decriminalized abortion in the past few years (). Access to contraception has also improved for many: today, women are more educated about family planning, and global rates of unintended pregnancy have declined by almost 20% over the past few decades, partly thanks to better access to contraception and reproductive education ().
Yet sharp regressions in reproductive rights have occurred in a few countries, fueling concerns of a broader backslide. The clearest example is the United States: in 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, ending federal protection of abortion rights and enabling over a dozen states to ban abortion. This move made the U.S. one of the only countries in recent decades to reverse previously guaranteed abortion rights (). Similarly, Poland instituted a near-total abortion ban in 2020, and countries like Nicaragua and El Salvador already had some of the world’s most restrictive abortion prohibitions. These cases are stark outliers – since 2000, just four countries (the U.S. included) have moved backward on legal abortion while dozens of others expanded access () – but they signal how political shifts can rapidly erode women’s bodily autonomy. Even where abortion remains legal, practical access can be undermined by restrictive policies or lack of healthcare infrastructure. For instance, in parts of sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, women face high barriers to reproductive healthcare despite nominal legal rights, contributing to persistently high rates of unsafe abortion. Globally, unsafe abortions remain a leading cause of maternal injury and death, with nearly 7 million women hospitalized from unsafe procedures annually () ().
Access to contraception shows both progress and unmet needs. Worldwide, use of modern contraceptives has risen steadily, empowering more women to plan their families. However, 218 million women who want to avoid pregnancy still lack access to modern contraception – a significant unmet need that has barely changed in recent years (). This gap is most acute in developing regions (for example, unmet need is highest in sub-Saharan Africa), and it has dire consequences for women’s health and futures (). Every year, around 287,000 women die from complications of pregnancy and childbirth, almost all in low- and middle-income countries (). Experts estimate that about one-third of these maternal deaths could be prevented if women who wish to avoid pregnancy had access to effective contraception (). Indeed, maternal health outcomes closely track the state of women’s rights: where women have access to reproductive healthcare and autonomy over childbearing, maternal mortality tends to fall. Globally, maternal mortality has decreased by 34% since 2000, thanks to improved healthcare access and gender-focused public health efforts () (). Yet disparities are glaring. In sub-Saharan Africa, maternal death rates remain extremely high despite improvements (), and even some wealthy countries are lagging. The United States, for example, has the highest maternal mortality rate among high-income nations – 17 deaths per 100,000 births in 2018, more than double most other developed countries (). This rate has worsened in recent years, partly attributed to unequal healthcare access and the country’s lack of guaranteed maternity support. Such statistics underscore that reproductive rights encompass not only legal abortion and contraception, but also the broader maternal healthcare and support systems that allow women to safely bear children if and when they choose.
Regional Trends: Reproductive rights are advancing in many parts of the world, even as they face pushback in others. Europe generally guarantees broad access to contraception and abortion, with a few exceptions – Poland and Malta have extremely restrictive abortion laws, standing out in a region of otherwise liberal policies. In Latin America, a historic shift is underway: once a bastion of strict abortion bans, countries from Mexico to Argentina have seen feminist movements win new reproductive freedoms. In contrast, Central America (e.g. Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua) maintains total abortion bans, and in parts of Africa and the Middle East, cultural and religious opposition keeps abortion largely illegal (with abortions often only permitted to save the mother’s life). Access to maternal healthcare is improving in South Asia and Africa (e.g. increased skilled birth attendance), but conflict and instability threaten these gains – Yemen and Sudan, for example, have seen maternal health indicators worsen amid war. And in Afghanistan, the Taliban’s return has devastated women’s healthcare: many female doctors and aid workers have been driven out, and women face growing barriers to clinics and hospitals, putting reproductive and maternal health in peril. Overall, while the global norm is increasingly to recognize reproductive rights as human rights, the pace of change and the setbacks vary widely by region and political climate.
Workplace Equality and Economic Participation
Women’s equal participation in the workforce and fair treatment on the job are essential for economic and social equity. Here, too, the world has seen both steady progress and stubborn gaps. Over the last few decades, women’s labor force participation has risen in many countries as educational attainment improved and social norms slowly evolved. Women today make up about 39-40% of the global labor force () and have entered virtually every industry and profession. Laws banning gender discrimination at work have become more common, and a growing number of countries mandate equal pay for equal work or have introduced paid family leave to help balance work and family life. As a result, the global gender pay gap has narrowed incrementally in some regions. On average, however, women worldwide still earn about 77 cents for every dollar men earn for work of equal value () – effectively a 16% wage gap. This disparity has barely budged in recent years, indicating that deep-rooted inequality in pay and career advancement persists in all corners of the globe.
Workforce participation and wage gaps: The simple reality is that women are less likely to be employed than men in most societies, and when employed, they often receive lower pay and fewer opportunities for advancement. The global labor force participation rate for women is just under 47%, compared to about 72% for men, a gap of 25 percentage points (). In regions like the Middle East and North Africa, social norms and legal barriers keep female participation extremely low (often under 25%), whereas in parts of East Asia and Europe, around 50–60% of women participate in the labor market. Even when women do the same work as men, pay inequity is widespread: for instance, the United Nations notes the global pay gap has stubbornly hovered around 20%, disadvantaging women in both developed and developing economies (). This gap is often larger for women of color, women with children (the “motherhood penalty”), and those in informal work. Encouragingly, some countries have taken steps to confront wage disparities – such as Iceland, which mandates pay equity audits, or Germany and France, which require large companies to report gender pay differences – but enforcement and cultural change are slow-moving.
Career advancement and leadership: A glass ceiling remains firmly in place in workplaces worldwide. Women are underrepresented in senior and high-paying roles, even in sectors where they form the bulk of entry-level employees. Globally, women hold roughly 24% of managerial positions (), and their share thins out further up the corporate hierarchy. As of 2023, only about 10% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women (53 women CEOs out of 500, the first time that group has even crossed the 10% mark) () (). In many countries, cultural biases and lack of support for working mothers mean that far fewer women reach executive roles or board positions compared to men. That said, there has been gradual progress: the proportion of women in management has inched up in recent years (for example, one survey of mid-sized companies in 28 countries found 33.5% of senior managers were women in 2022, a modest increase) (). Governments and companies have also started implementing measures like mentorship programs, leadership quotas or targets, and anti-harassment policies to foster women’s career growth. Nordic countries and some European Union members lead on women’s workplace equality, thanks to strong gender-equality policies – for instance, countries like Norway and France require corporate boards to include at least 40% women, which has significantly boosted female representation at the top. In contrast, parts of South Asia and the Middle East have very few women in leadership, reflecting broader gender norms that limit women’s public roles (for example, women account for under 5% of executives in Japan and South Korea, and similarly low rates in Gulf states).
Family policies and workplace support: One of the most critical factors for workplace equality is how societies handle parental leave and caregiving responsibilities. Here, the divide between countries can be stark. The vast majority of nations mandate paid maternity leave – at least 14 weeks of paid leave for mothers is guaranteed in 118 countries () – and many also provide paid paternity leave for fathers (over 100 countries offer some form of paid paternity leave, though often only for a few days or weeks) (). Europe leads on generous parental leave: for example, Sweden and Norway offer about a year of paid leave shared between parents, and Estonia provides over 80 weeks (a year and a half) of paid parental leave for new families (). In contrast, the United States stands out as the only high-income country (and one of only a handful of countries globally) that does not guarantee any paid leave for new mothers or fathers at the national level (). This lack of support forces many American women to return to work within weeks of childbirth or drop out of the workforce, contributing to career interruptions and earnings gaps. Countries with limited leave and childcare support tend to see lower female labor participation, as women often bear the brunt of unpaid caregiving. Encouragingly, a number of nations have recognized this and are expanding parental benefits – for instance, Spain recently extended paid paternity leave to equal the duration of maternity leave, aiming to encourage shared childcare duties and reduce the “career penalty” on women. Workplace flexibility is another area of improvement: the COVID-19 pandemic normalized remote work and flexible hours in many industries, which can benefit women juggling family responsibilities (though it also brought challenges of blurred work-life boundaries). Overall, government policies that support work-family balance (like childcare services, parental leave, and anti-discrimination laws) are proving vital for women’s equal economic participation. The World Bank’s Women, Business and the Law report finds that on average, women have about 76% of the legal economic rights that men do, and in 95 countries there is still no legal guarantee of equal pay for equal work () (). Where legal reforms have removed barriers – such as lifting bans on women in certain jobs or granting women equal property rights – women’s employment has risen, showing the importance of continued legal progress.
COVID-19 setbacks: A major recent factor in workplace equality is the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a disproportionately regressive impact on women in the workforce. Sectors like hospitality, retail, and care – which employ large numbers of women – were hardest hit by lockdowns and cutbacks. As a result, women globally lost jobs at higher rates than men during the pandemic. By mid-2020, women accounted for 54% of overall job losses worldwide, despite being only 39% of the workforce (). McKinsey estimated that women’s jobs were 1.8 times more vulnerable to COVID-related disruptions than men’s jobs (). Additionally, with schools closed and health systems strained, the burden of unpaid care (childcare, elder care, home schooling) fell heavily on women, forcing many to reduce paid work hours or leave jobs. This “she-cession” set back women’s labor participation to levels of several years prior in some regions. For example, North America saw female labor force participation drop several percentage points in 2020, and in South Asia, the pandemic erased many of the livelihood gains women had made. While many economies have rebounded, the recovery has often been slower for women, especially mothers, leading to fears that some of these losses could persist unless addressed. This example underscores how quickly progress can reverse under strain: without deliberate efforts to support women (like targeted stimulus, childcare support, retraining programs), economic crises tend to hit women harder and widen gender gaps () ().
Regional Trends: Workplace equality varies widely across regions due to cultural norms, economic structures, and policy choices. Northern Europe and Scandinavia are among the closest to gender-equal workplaces, boasting high female employment, small wage gaps, and strong representation of women in high-skilled roles. These countries pair progressive attitudes with comprehensive support systems (e.g. Norway’s workforce is nearly 47% female and the gender pay gap is around 5-6% for full-time workers, one of the lowest). Western Europe, North America, and Oceania also perform relatively well, though gaps remain – the U.S., for instance, has high female workforce participation but also one of the largest pay gaps and poor family leave support among peers. East Asia offers a mixed picture: China has high female labor force participation (~61%) and many women in STEM fields, but few in senior management and a widening pay gap; Japan and South Korea have highly educated women yet some of the lowest female workforce and leadership rates in the OECD due to traditional gender roles. Latin America saw significant increases in women’s workforce entry over the past two decades, aided by better education and falling fertility rates; however, many women are in informal employment with low protections, and the pandemic hit this region’s women particularly hard, causing what the UN called a “shadow pandemic” of female job loss. Africa has the world’s highest average female labor force participation (around 58%, driven by necessity and agriculture), but much of women’s work is informal and unpaid. Legal inequalities also persist – for example, until reforms in 2021, Gabon had outdated laws limiting women’s work and property rights, which were overhauled to better empower women () (). In the Middle East and North Africa, women’s economic participation remains the lowest globally (often under 20%). Some Gulf countries are making efforts to involve more women in the private sector – Saudi Arabia, notably, has lifted its ban on women driving and eased some male-guardian restrictions on work and travel, contributing to a rising female labor participation (which climbed from 19% in 2016 to about 36% in 2022 after these reforms). Still, norms and legal barriers (like needing a husband’s permission to work in certain contexts) continue to restrict many women’s economic roles in the region. In sum, while more women than ever are in the workforce, true workplace equality – equal pay, equal leadership, equal economic security – remains a work in progress in every region of the world.
Political Representation and Leadership
Women’s representation in government and decision-making positions is a crucial measure of gender equality and a driver of women-friendly policies. Over the past generation, the share of women in politics worldwide has risen markedly, yet it remains far from parity. As of early 2024, women hold about 26.9% of seats in national parliaments globally (). This is roughly double the level of 25 years ago (in 1995, it was around 11% ()), thanks in large part to gender quota systems and sustained advocacy. Many countries have implemented electoral quotas requiring a certain percentage of legislative candidates or seats to go to women, which has proven effective at boosting women’s presence. For example, Rwanda leads the world with 61% of its parliament female, a result of post-genocide reforms and quotas; Mexico’s Congress is about 50% women after a parity law was enacted; and countries from Senegal to Nepal have reached 40% or more women in parliament through quotas and proportional representation systems. Additionally, women now serve as heads of state or government in 17 countries (as of 2024) – up from just 4 countries in 1995 () (). These include nations like New Zealand, Finland, Ethiopia, and Barbados, illustrating that female leadership at the highest level, while still an exception, is becoming increasingly common across different regions.
Despite this progress, political power is still overwhelmingly in male hands, and in some places women’s representation is even regressing. Globally, one in four parliamentarians is a woman, meaning three-quarters of lawmakers are men (). The growth in women’s parliamentary share has actually slowed in recent years – in 2023 it rose only 0.4 percentage points from the year before (). At this pace, true parity remains decades away. Moreover, women hold only 22.8% of ministerial (cabinet) positions worldwide, and they are often entrusted with “softer” portfolios (like education or social affairs) rather than high-prestige ministries such as defense or finance (). In fact, women account for only about 10% of ministers of defense and local government globally, reflecting a continued bias in assigning women to less powerful roles (). In 27 countries, women make up less than 10% of parliament members, meaning political decision-making in those nations remains almost entirely male-dominated (). For instance, in Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu, women held zero seats in recent years (though as of 2023, every country in the world has at least one woman in its legislature, after the last all-male parliaments finally included women) (). Parts of the Middle East and South Asia lag notably: Yemen, Oman, and Lebanon have under 5% female lawmakers, and Sri Lanka and Thailand are in single digits as well. Meanwhile, even in strong democracies, women are underrepresented: the United States Congress is about 28% female, and women make up only ~35% of the European Parliament. These numbers indicate incremental improvement but also highlight ceilings that have yet to be broken.
Key drivers and obstacles: The increased presence of women in politics is largely tied to deliberate measures. Over 130 countries have implemented some type of gender quota or reservation for women in political bodies, whether at the national or local level. These range from voluntary party quotas to constitutional mandates. Such policies in countries like India (one-third of local council seats reserved for women) and France (parity law for candidate lists) have normalized women as political actors and created pipelines of experienced female leaders. Additionally, civil society and international organizations have pushed to empower women politically – training programs for women candidates, funding for women’s campaigns, and cross-party women’s caucuses all help. However, formidable barriers remain: women often face cultural prejudice that politics is “men’s business,” lack of party support, harassment (including online abuse and even physical violence in some cases), and greater family responsibilities that make the rough-and-tumble of politics difficult to enter. In some countries, societal attitudes are sliding backwards, with conservative or extremist groups opposing women in leadership. For example, researchers note a link between the rise of nationalistic populism and pushback against gender equality in governance (). Populist governments in places like Hungary and Brazil (under Bolsonaro) sidelined women’s rights agendas, and often fewer women were elevated to leadership under those regimes. Encouragingly, backlash can spur resistance: Poland’s populist government faced mass protests (the “Women’s Strike”) led by women activists, and in October 2023 Polish women voters were credited with helping oust that government in favor of one promising to restore rule of law and women’s rights. This dynamic interplay shows that women’s political representation can advance or regress depending on political will and societal vigilance.
Real-world impacts: Why does it matter if women are at the table? Studies and examples worldwide demonstrate that women leaders often prioritize issues that benefit women and families, such as healthcare, education, anti-corruption, and social welfare. For instance, countries with more women in parliament have been quicker to pass laws on domestic violence, childcare, and reproductive health. Rwanda, after achieving a female-majority parliament, enacted progressive laws on women’s inheritance and land rights. Spain’s government (63% female ministers in 2020) passed landmark sexual consent legislation and boosted parental leave. Conversely, the absence of women’s voices can mean neglect of half the population’s needs – as seen starkly in Afghanistan, where the Taliban’s exclusion of women from all government roles since 2021 has led to policies brutally restricting women’s basic rights. In sum, women’s political empowerment tends to correlate with more inclusive and responsive governance. Yet, as of today, political power structures remain male-heavy, and women often have to fight simply to hold onto the gains made. Sustained efforts – from legal quotas to mentorship of young women leaders – are needed to ensure the trend toward greater representation continues rather than stalls.
Regional Trends: Political representation for women differs by region, often reflecting broader social norms. Nordic countries are perennial leaders: Iceland, Finland, Norway, and Sweden all have over 45% of their parliament seats held by women, and they’ve had multiple women heads of government. Western Europe and the Americas have generally high representation as well – New Zealand and Canada surpass 30%, and much of Latin America is in the 30-50% range, boosted by quota laws in countries like Mexico, Costa Rica, and Argentina. Sub-Saharan Africa has seen dramatic improvements: aside from Rwanda’s top ranking, nations such as Namibia, South Africa, Senegal, and Mozambique have 40% or more women in parliament, partly due to party or constitutional quotas. However, other African countries lag (Nigeria’s parliament is only ~7% women, and the Democratic Republic of Congo about 17%). Asia is varied: Nepal (~34%) and Taiwan (~42%) are success stories, whereas Japan (~10%) and Sri Lanka (~5%) are among the lowest for women in national legislatures, reflecting traditional norms and weak quota mechanisms. The Middle East and North Africa region remains lowest on average, though there are bright spots – UAE mandates 50% of its advisory council be women, Tunisia and Morocco implemented quota systems resulting in 20%+ women in parliament, and Saudi Arabia (an absolute monarchy) appointed women to its Shura Council for the first time in the 2010s. A glaring regression has been Afghanistan, where women held roughly 27% of parliamentary seats under the previous government (meeting its quota law) (), but since the Taliban takeover in 2021, no women are present in the de facto government or its council. Another concerning case is Turkey, which while not low in women MPs (~17%), withdrew in 2021 from the Istanbul Convention (a key European treaty on preventing violence against women), signaling a potential deprioritization of women’s rights at the policy level. Overall, most regions are trending upward in women’s political representation thanks to quotas and activism, but progress is uneven and can be fragile without continuous support.
Legal Protections and Rights (Violence, Marriage, Autonomy)
The legal framework in each country determines women’s rights in areas like protection from violence, marriage and divorce, property, and personal autonomy. Over the past few decades, there have been sweeping legal reforms worldwide aimed at leveling the law for women – yet significant gaps and enforcement issues remain. One major area of progress is legislation against gender-based violence. Until the 1990s, domestic violence was not explicitly outlawed in most countries; as late as 2000, 80% of people lived in nations with no legal penalties for domestic abuse (). That has changed rapidly. By 2023, over 90% of the global population lives in countries with laws against domestic violence (). In raw numbers, at least 144 countries have passed laws to protect women from domestic violence (), and many have also criminalized sexual harassment, rape, and other forms of abuse. This represents a transformative acknowledgment that violence against women is not a “private” matter but a human rights violation requiring state intervention. Regions like Latin America have pioneered comprehensive “violence against women” laws (for example, Brazil’s Maria da Penha Law in 2006), and nearly every European and African country now has some legal protection for victims of domestic violence. In Africa, a milestone was Gabon’s 2021 law eliminating violence against women, part of a broader legal overhaul that improved women’s status in marriage and work () (). International instruments have also played a role – the Istanbul Convention in Europe set standards for anti-violence measures (though, notably, Turkey’s withdrawal from it in 2021 was a setback). Despite these advances, laws on paper don’t always translate to safety on the ground. Enforcement is often weak: police and courts may not enforce restraining orders or prosecute abusers, especially where patriarchal attitudes persist. Furthermore, about 1 in 3 women worldwide still experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, a figure that has not significantly decreased (). The COVID-19 pandemic even saw spikes in domestic violence reports (“shadow pandemic”) as women were locked down with abusers. So while legal protections have expanded, the real challenge lies in implementation and shifting societal norms to truly protect women from violence.
Other legal rights in marriage and family life have also improved overall, yet problematic laws endure. Many countries have reformed marriage laws to ban child marriage or raise the legal marriage age to 18. Global child marriage rates have been declining: today, 1 in 5 young women (20–24) were married before age 18, versus nearly 1 in 4 a decade ago (). That positive trend translates to 640 million women alive today who were married as children – still a huge number, but it would have been higher without legal and social efforts (). South Asia, which accounts for 45% of all child brides, has seen countries like India and Bangladesh enact stricter laws and public campaigns that reduced child marriage prevalence (though it remains high in rural and poor communities) (). In sub-Saharan Africa, Ethiopia, Ghana, and others have also seen declines. However, conflict and economic hardship risk reversing this: in parts of the Middle East and East Africa hit by war or drought, families may resort to marrying off daughters young, and enforcement of laws weakens. Some countries still allow exceptions that effectively permit child marriage (for instance, legal with parental consent at younger ages).
Another contentious issue is marital rights and autonomy. Historically, many legal systems treated women as subordinate to fathers or husbands – requiring male permission for basic activities or giving husbands unilateral control in marriage. This has gradually changed. By 2022, 190 countries had signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), committing to reform unequal laws. As a result, women’s legal capacity is now recognized nearly everywhere: women can sign contracts, open bank accounts, and own property in their own name in the vast majority of countries (a stark contrast to a few generations ago). Even so, in 178 countries some legal barriers to women’s full economic participation still exist () – these include laws that restrict women from working in certain industries, require a husband’s consent for employment, or limit women’s property and inheritance rights. For example, until recently, women in Gabon needed their husband’s permission to work – a provision struck down in 2021 () (). And in Saudi Arabia, women were long denied the right to travel abroad or obtain a passport without a male guardian’s approval; this rule was lifted in 2019, a notable step toward female autonomy in a society with an entrenched guardianship system. Saudi women can now also drive (since 2018) and have greater role in public life, showing how legal reforms can quickly expand freedoms if there is political will. Contrast that with Afghanistan under the Taliban: the regime has effectively erased women’s legal personhood, banning women from traveling more than 72 kilometers without a male chaperone and re-imposing strict de facto guardianship that confines women to the home () (). This extreme regression highlights how fragile gains can be: Afghan women, who once could serve as judges, attend university, and move about independently, have seen those rights stripped virtually overnight by a change in power.
Sexual and reproductive self-determination in marriage is another area of legal struggle. A notable example is marital rape – whether a husband can be prosecuted for raping his wife. Shockingly, more than half of countries do not explicitly criminalize marital rape, essentially leaving a legal loophole for spousal sexual abuse (). While countries like South Africa, Canada, and most of Europe have long since outlawed rape in all circumstances (including marriage), others maintain outdated exemptions. In South Asia, only Bhutan and Nepal explicitly criminalize marital rape, whereas India, Pakistan, and others do not (). Several Middle Eastern and North African nations similarly lack clear prohibition, often due to conservative interpretations of religion or reluctance to interfere in “private” matters. There have been efforts to change this – Lebanon and Jordan repealed laws in recent years that had allowed rapists to escape punishment by marrying their victims (so-called “marry-your-rapist” laws, which still exist in about 20 countries in some form) (). But progress is slow when confronting deeply embedded patriarchal norms. The existence of such laws underscores that legal equality is not yet a reality for women in many fundamental aspects of life.
On a positive note, a handful of countries have achieved near-total legal parity. According to the World Bank’s Women, Business and the Law index, 12 countries – all in the OECD (including Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, and others) – now score a full 100, meaning their laws do not discriminate based on gender in the areas measured () (). These countries have systematically removed inequalities (for example, ensuring women can confer citizenship to children equally, have equal inheritance rights, and equal rights in divorce). Such examples serve as models. Moreover, international agreements and movements apply pressure: the Beijing Platform for Action (1995) spurred 274 legal reforms in 131 countries in the ensuing decades () (). The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 5) keep gender equality on national agendas, and human rights organizations monitor and campaign against discriminatory laws.
Enforcement and societal attitudes: It’s critical to note that laws on the books are just one part of the puzzle. In many societies, informal or customary laws still govern behavior – for instance, even if child marriage is illegal nationally, traditional community practices might allow it unless actively countered. Similarly, police and judicial bias can undermine women’s legal protections. Many rape laws go unenforced due to stigma or officials not taking victims seriously. And where women have legal rights, they may not be aware of them or able to afford to pursue justice. Hence the role of civil society and education is huge: women’s rights organizations, shelters, legal aid groups, and awareness campaigns are often the ones translating legal rights into real change on the ground. Countries like Spain and Morocco have launched national plans to change social attitudes on domestic violence, alongside law enforcement training, yielding better reporting and support for victims. In contrast, places where conservative forces are “stripping gender equality language” from policies (as noted by Equal Measures 2030) () often see a chilling effect on enforcement too.
Regional Trends: Legal equality tends to be highest in Europe, the Americas, and parts of East Asia, and lower in the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa – but every region has its complexities. Western Europe and North America generally have comprehensive legal protections for women and strong rule of law (though the U.S. notably lacks some guarantees like equal pay or ERA in its constitution, and some European countries still have gaps, e.g. Switzerland only outlawed marital rape in 2004). Eastern Europe and Central Asia made many reforms post-1990s (aligning with CEDAW and EU norms), yet rising authoritarianism in some places threatens those gains. Latin America has progressive laws on paper – many countries have advanced constitutions guaranteeing gender equality and violence protections – but machismo culture can impede enforcement; still, some of the world’s most innovative gender laws (like Bolivia’s law against political harassment of female candidates) come from this region. Sub-Saharan Africa has seen a wave of legal reforms: for instance, Kenya’s 2010 constitution enshrined gender equality, Ethiopia revised its family code to give women equal rights in marriage, and Botswana’s courts recently struck down laws that denied women equal inheritance. The challenge in Africa is often customary law: in rural areas, traditional practices (like bride price, polygamy, or female genital mutilation) may conflict with modern laws. Middle East and North Africa (MENA) remains the region with the largest legal gender gaps. Some countries still have outright discriminatory laws – e.g. women in Saudi Arabia only gained the right to marry without a guardian’s permission in recent years; Jordan and Morocco only recently removed “marry the rapist” clauses; and personal status laws in Gulf States give men more rights in divorce and child custody. However, even MENA has bright spots: Tunisia has long been a regional leader in women’s legal rights (abolishing polygamy since 1950s, equal divorce rights), and Egypt and Morocco have made incremental improvements. South Asia has strong laws in countries like India (which has numerous pro-women constitutional provisions and laws), but enforcement is uneven and certain practices (dowry, marital rape non-criminalization in India) persist. East Asia ranges from more gender-equal legal systems (like Philippines and Mongolia) to places like China, where women legally have equality but in practice face discrimination (e.g. job ads specifying “men only” are technically illegal but still occur). Overall, the legal trend is bending toward equality – many discriminatory laws have been repealed in the last decade alone – yet in practice, a woman’s life chances are still heavily influenced by where she lives and the cultural context around her.
Social and Cultural Freedoms (Education, Dress, Mobility, Societal Roles)
Beyond formal laws, women’s day-to-day freedoms in society – access to education, cultural expectations, dress codes, freedom of movement – are critical indicators of their status. Education is perhaps the biggest success story in women’s rights over the long term. Globally, gender gaps in education have narrowed significantly: in primary education, girls’ enrollment now equals or surpasses boys’ in most countries; in secondary education, the gap has also reduced, though it persists in some low-income regions. The result is that more women than ever are literate and educated. Female literacy rose from 71% in 1995 to 84% by 2020 (). Young women in particular have seen gains – in many countries, young women are now more likely to attend university than young men. For instance, in Iran and Saudi Arabia, women make up over 50% of university students, a remarkable statistic given other restrictions in those societies. Education access for girls has been a major focus of international development, and it’s paid off: the global rate of girls out of primary school fell from 20% in 1998 to 8% in 2018. However, the job is not finished. The UN estimates that at current rates, 110 million girls and young women will still be out of school in 2030 (), due to factors like poverty, early marriage, and conflict. In parts of sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, girls’ secondary school completion remains much lower than boys’. For example, in Nigeria and Pakistan, social norms and insecurity keep female secondary enrollment far behind. And the single most devastating reversal in girls’ education is again Afghanistan, where the Taliban have banned girls from attending secondary school and university since 2021. Overnight, millions of Afghan girls who dreamed of careers in medicine, engineering, or teaching have seen those dreams dashed by draconian edicts – a shocking regression from the progress of the 2000s when female education flourished in Afghanistan. Globally, the “gender education gap” is now more about quality and higher education: while basic education for girls has improved, women are still underrepresented in STEM fields in many countries, and illiteracy disproportionately affects older women who missed out on schooling. Cultural attitudes that do not value educating girls (or fear educated women becoming “too independent”) remain a barrier in some communities. Yet the overall trend is heartening – educated young women today are entering adulthood in greater numbers than any previous generation, better equipped to assert their rights and aspirations.
Cultural restrictions and dress codes: Women’s social freedoms often bump up against traditional or religious norms that dictate their behavior, including how they dress and interact in public. In some societies, women face strict dress codes enforced by law or custom. A prominent example is Iran, where since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, women have been required by law to wear the Islamic hijab (headscarf) and modest clothing in public. This mandate has been a flashpoint: in 2022, the death of Mahsa Amini, a young woman arrested by Iran’s “morality police” for allegedly improper hijab, sparked massive protests led by women under the slogan “Woman, Life, Freedom.” Women burned headscarves and cut their hair in defiance, demanding bodily autonomy and an end to the compulsory dress code. The Iranian government responded with a brutal crackdown, illustrating how women’s assertion of a basic freedom – choosing their attire – can become a battleground for broader rights. Similarly, Afghanistan’s Taliban regime has reimposed severe dress and behavioral codes, requiring women to cover fully (often with burqas) and barring them from most jobs and public spaces. In Saudi Arabia, dress codes have been slightly relaxed under recent reforms (the abaya cloak is no longer legally mandatory, though many women still wear it), showing an easing of one aspect of control. It’s worth noting that dress codes aren’t solely an issue in Muslim-majority countries: for instance, in France and some European nations, the state bans certain religious attire (like full-face veils) in public, a policy criticized for infringing on Muslim women’s freedom to dress as they choose. Thus, women can find themselves constrained by either mandates to wear certain attire or bans against wearing it – both ultimately stem from others dictating women’s appearance.
Mobility and public life: In many cultures, women’s freedom to move about – to travel, to drive, to be in public unaccompanied – has been curtailed. A headline development was Saudi Arabia lifting its ban on women driving in 2018, which was a symbolically and practically significant freedom (prior to that, Saudi women had to rely on male relatives or drivers to get around). Saudi Arabia also removed the requirement for a male guardian’s permission to obtain a passport or travel in 2019 (). These changes have literally and figuratively “put women in the driver’s seat,” leading to more women working and participating in society. On the other hand, some regions have seen increased restrictions: Afghanistan (again) stands out for effectively segregating women from public life, as noted earlier – women cannot travel long distances alone, are largely not permitted in parks or gyms, and even face certain days when they may not visit public spaces in some cities. In parts of conservative Pakistan or Sudan, while not codified in law, women often face harassment or family disapproval if they travel solo or at night. There are also subtler social freedoms: the ability to go out without asking permission, to socialize freely, to choose one’s friends. In patriarchal contexts, women and girls may still be closely monitored by male family members, limiting these freedoms. Conversely, in much of the world today, women enjoy near-equal social freedom as men – they can drive, vote, join clubs, attend sporting events, and so on. It’s telling to consider that until recently, women in Iran were barred from even entering sports stadiums as spectators (a rule slightly relaxed in 2019 under public pressure). And in India, a high-profile court case in 2018 struck down a temple’s ban on women of menstruating age from entering, highlighting the clash between tradition and modern principles of gender equality. These examples illustrate that social and cultural restrictions can often outlast legal ones, operating in the realm of custom and religion.
Changing norms and activism: Around the world, women themselves have been at the forefront of challenging restrictive norms. From the #MeToo movement, which began in the U.S. and quickly spread globally to call out sexual harassment and abuse, to local campaigns against female genital mutilation (FGM) in Africa, women are speaking up for change. The #MeToo movement in particular broke silences in countries as diverse as China, Nigeria, France, and India, leading to new conversations and in some cases tougher harassment laws or workplace policies. In the Arab world, online movements like #BringBackOurGirls (Nigeria) or #MosqueMeToo have given voice to issues previously taboo. In 2022-2023, Iranian women’s defiance against compulsory hijab became an international rallying point, garnering solidarity from women’s movements elsewhere. Social media has amplified these voices, helping women in repressive environments find support and share their stories. Meanwhile, traditional attitudes are gradually shifting among younger generations. Surveys show that younger men are more supportive of gender equality than their elders in many countries (though there has also been a backlash among some young men influenced by extremist or misogynist online ideologies). During COVID-19, as families saw the dual burden on women, there have been calls to redistribute unpaid care work more evenly – an issue now rising on policy agendas.
Education and economic necessity are also eroding some restrictions: as more families see value in daughters’ education and wages, practices like early marriage and seclusion of women (purdah) are slowly declining in many communities. For instance, Bangladesh has more women working in its garment factories and as health workers, which has somewhat challenged old norms that women should not work outside. In Ethiopia and Kenya, community dialogues by NGOs have helped convince villages to abandon FGM and child marriage practices. These changes are patchy but important. They show that improving women’s social freedoms often requires community engagement and cultural change from within, not just top-down decrees.
Regional Trends: Cultural freedoms for women often mirror the broader status of women’s rights in each region. Scandinavian and Western countries generally have very high social freedom for women – dress is a matter of personal choice, women move about freely at all hours (though safety from violence is still a concern), and norms strongly discourage overt sexism. Latin America has vibrant women’s movements and, socially, women are visible and active, but issues like machismo and high rates of gender-based violence constrain true freedom (many women in Latin America report not feeling safe in public spaces, which is a freedom issue itself). South Asia has deep-rooted traditions – for example, “eve-teasing” (street harassment) is a problem in India and Bangladesh, curtailing women’s comfort in public; however, big cities are seeing pushback, with women-only transport options and public awareness. The Middle East/North Africa is perhaps the region with the most visible social restrictions: from required hijab in Iran, to de facto guardianship in the Gulf, to war-torn Afghanistan’s nightmare scenario. Yet within MENA, there’s contrast – Lebanon and Tunisia have relatively liberal social environments for women (no dress code, women in public life), while Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Afghanistan impose far stricter codes. Sub-Saharan Africa is culturally diverse: in many African societies, women have strong community roles and freedom of mobility (indeed they often shoulder the burden of traveling for water, markets, etc.), but harmful practices like FGM (still affecting roughly 200 million women worldwide) and widow “inheritance” persist in some areas, impinging on bodily autonomy. East Asia also varies: China has no formal social restrictions on women, yet son-preference historically led to skewed sex ratios (a sign of valuing boys over girls); Japan and South Korea have modern economies but quite traditional expectations of women as primary caregivers, leading to social pressure on women to leave work once married or pregnant (the phenomenon of “matahara” – maternity harassment in Japan).
In essence, social freedoms for women tend to advance hand-in-hand with education and economic empowerment – as women become more educated and financially independent, they gain greater say in how they live their lives. However, when extremist ideologies or political agendas rise, even these social freedoms can be rolled back, as seen in settings like Iran’s renewed enforcement of hijab or the Taliban’s gender apartheid in Afghanistan. The push and pull between progressive and conservative forces in society will continue to shape the daily freedoms women enjoy (or lack).
The United States: Domestic Shifts and Global Influence
The United States has long presented itself as a champion of women’s rights, both at home and on the international stage – but recent shifts have raised questions about its commitment and the ripple effects worldwide. Domestically, the U.S. has seen a mix of progress and regression in women’s rights in recent years. On one hand, American women have achieved high levels of education and workforce participation, and social movements like #MeToo have led to greater awareness of gender-based harassment and assault. On the other, political polarization has stalled or reversed certain legal protections. The most dramatic change was the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson (June 2022) decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion after nearly 50 years. This ruling was described by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights as “a huge blow to women’s human rights and gender equality” (), and UN experts denounced it as a “shocking and dangerous rollback” that will jeopardize women’s health and lives (). Practically, the Dobbs decision allowed individual U.S. states to heavily restrict or ban abortion: as of 2023, about 14–15 states (mostly in the South and Midwest) have near-total bans, and several others imposed severe gestational limits. Millions of American women thus lost easy access to safe abortion, especially poor and rural women who cannot easily travel to permissive states. This regression places the U.S. starkly out of step with the global trend of expanding abortion rights (). Indeed, the U.S. is now one of only a few countries in the world to have moved backwards on legal abortion in decades, joining the ranks of Poland and El Salvador in that regard ().
Beyond abortion, other policy changes signaled a deprioritization of women’s rights by some actors. During the Trump administration (2017–2021), the U.S. government reinstated and expanded the “Global Gag Rule,” which barred U.S. aid funding to any international health organizations that even counseled or advocated for abortion. This policy (reversed by the Biden administration in 2021) was shown to have harmful effects on women’s health abroad – one study found it led to higher pregnancy and abortion rates in affected African countries due to reduced access to contraception () (). Domestically, there were efforts to roll back protections against gender discrimination: for example, changes to Title IX regulations under Education Secretary Betsy DeVos weakened safeguards for victims of sexual assault on campus (those were later revised again under the Biden administration). The U.S. has also notably failed to advance certain women’s rights legislation in recent years, such as the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the Constitution, which would explicitly guarantee sex equality – it remains unratified after a century-long campaign, partly due to a resurgence of conservative opposition. Additionally, the U.S. does not mandate paid maternity leave or paid sick leave nationally, which is often highlighted as a major gap in support for American women (and parents generally). While these issues are hotly debated rather than settled regressions, they contribute to the sense that the U.S. has lost focus on proactively advancing women’s rights.
America's abortion ban will hurt women everywhere | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
America's abortion ban will hurt women everywhere | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
Domestic implications: American women are feeling the effects of these shifts. The most immediate is on reproductive health: with abortion clinics closing across multiple states, some women face dangerous delays or resort to unsafe methods. Doctors in restrictive states report fears and confusion over treating pregnancy complications, as laws create uncertainty about what care is allowed. There have been reports of women with miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies being denied timely care due to abortion bans, putting their lives at risk – a scenario human rights groups warn is a violation of the right to life and health () (). Moreover, these policies disproportionately affect marginalized women: Black and Indigenous women in the U.S. already have significantly higher maternal mortality rates, and those could worsen with reduced reproductive care. It’s noted that the U.S. has an overall maternal mortality rate of 23.8 per 100,000 (2020), which is more than triple that of many peer countries and rising () (). Losing abortion access in high-mortality states (like Mississippi, which has the nation’s highest maternal death rate) could further compound risks for women. Beyond health, the current climate has galvanized women voters and activists. In the 2022 and 2023 elections, we saw surges in women registering to vote and turning out in response to abortion restrictions – e.g. Kansas voters decisively rejected an anti-abortion constitutional amendment in August 2022, a sign that even in conservative areas, many Americans support maintaining women’s rights () (). Women-led organizations have also ramped up efforts to assist those affected (e.g., abortion funds helping with travel). However, the chilling effect on women’s equality is real: when a fundamental right like control over one’s body is withdrawn, it can undermine women’s status in society at large. Some fear that the Roe reversal could open doors to challenges against other rights (like contraception access or LGBTQ+ rights) – indeed, a few U.S. states have considered bills limiting contraception or gender-affirming care, reflecting an environment of heightened contestation over bodily autonomy.
America's abortion ban will hurt women everywhere | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
America's abortion ban will hurt women everywhere | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
Global influence and reactions: The U.S., as a superpower and often a trend-setter, wields significant influence on global gender equality movements – for better or worse. Historically, American leadership was pivotal in moments like the 1995 Beijing World Conference on Women (where Hillary Clinton famously declared “women’s rights are human rights”), and U.S. funding and diplomacy have supported women’s rights initiatives worldwide. When the U.S. “loses focus” or reverses course, it reverberates. After the Dobbs decision, leaders and activists around the world voiced alarm. UN experts warned that the U.S. reversal would embolden anti-abortion movements globally and set a dangerous precedent () (). In many countries, conservative groups cited the U.S. example to push their agendas, arguing that if America no longer guarantees abortion, why should they? For instance, anti-choice politicians in Latin America and Europe applauded Roe’s downfall – though notably, it did not stop continued progress in Latin America’s green wave (if anything, it reminded those movements to guard against complacency). European allies like France and the UK reacted by reaffirming their commitment to abortion rights; France even moved to inscribe abortion rights in its national constitution, partly in response to U.S. events. The global women’s rights community largely condemned the U.S. decision, seeing it as a setback that could weaken international norms. The World Health Organization’s director-general said the rollback was “disappointing” and hurt decades of progress.
From a geopolitical standpoint, the U.S. pulling back on women’s rights undermines its credibility to advocate human rights abroad. It becomes harder for the U.S. to press other countries on issues like women’s political inclusion or violence against women if its own house is in disarray on core issues like reproductive freedom. Adversarial governments have seized on this to accuse the U.S. of hypocrisy. For example, after Roe was overturned, Chinese state media criticized the U.S. on human rights, and some authoritarian leaders who oppress women pointed to U.S. “regression” to deflect criticism. American funding for global women’s health is another concern: the U.S. is the largest donor to international family planning programs (over $600 million in 2023) (). If domestic politics lead to cuts in that funding (a real possibility if anti-abortion legislators block spending), it could drastically affect services for millions of women in Africa and Asia who rely on U.S.-funded clinics. Chatham House warned that a reduction in U.S. global health aid related to reproductive health could result in clinic closures, contraceptive shortages, and more unsafe abortions in developing countries () (). This demonstrates how intimately connected U.S. policy is to women’s lives far beyond its borders.
America's abortion ban will hurt women everywhere | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
America's abortion ban will hurt women everywhere | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
At the same time, American civil society and state governments have tried to fill gaps and continue international engagement. After 2022, several U.S. states (like California, New York) enacted laws to protect abortion access and even fund out-of-state patients, signaling that a sizable segment of the country remains committed to reproductive rights. American philanthropies and NGOs increased their support to global gender equality funds to counter any decline in government leadership. In diplomacy, the Biden administration affirmed women’s rights as foreign policy priorities (reviving the State Department’s Office of Global Women’s Issues, etc.), even as domestic battles continued. This duality can be confusing for the world: the U.S. at federal and state levels is sending mixed signals.
In summary, the U.S. “losing focus” – epitomized by the loss of Roe and partisan gridlock on gender issues – has both concrete consequences for American women and a broader chilling effect internationally. Domestically, it means women in different states have unequal rights and health risks, and it has energized a new wave of activism alongside fear of further erosions. Globally, it potentially weakens the momentum of gender equality movements and emboldens opposition in patriarchal societies, while also removing the moral high ground the U.S. often claimed in human rights dialogues. It serves as a reminder that progress is not linear or guaranteed, even in countries long seen as “developed” or rights-respecting. Advocates worldwide have taken the U.S. experience as a caution – stressing the need to enshrine women’s rights securely (for example, through constitutional protections or international law) so they cannot be easily undone by shifting political winds ().
Conclusion
The global analysis of women’s rights reveals a complex picture: remarkable progress in many areas, yet real regressions and persistent inequalities that underscore how fragile these gains can be. On the one hand, we can celebrate that far more women today have access to education, healthcare, legal rights, and leadership opportunities than their grandmothers did. Reproductive rights have expanded in much of the world (with Latin America’s historic abortion reforms as a prime example), workplace equality is slowly improving with narrowing pay gaps and more women in management, and women’s voices in politics are louder than ever – with nearly every country now featuring women in its governance. Legal reforms have swept away many discriminatory statutes; for instance, domestic violence is now criminalized in the vast majority of countries, something almost unthinkable 30 years ago (). Social attitudes have also evolved, particularly among younger generations and in urban areas, towards greater acceptance of women’s equality in roles from the boardroom to the battlefield. These advances are the result of decades of advocacy by women’s movements, enlightened policy choices, and international cooperation.
On the other hand, the gains are uneven and under attack in a number of places, raising the alarm that we may indeed be in a period of “regression” for women’s rights in certain contexts. In recent years, an uptick in authoritarianism, conflict, and conservative backlash has rolled back women’s rights in some countries. The starkest case is Afghanistan, where the clock has been turned back a century on women’s freedoms. But more subtly, dozens of countries have stagnated on gender equality goals, and as one index warns, if backsliding continues, the world could reach 2030 (the SDG target year) with worse gender equality than in 2015 (). It is a sobering thought that despite all the progress, one-third of countries made no forward progress since 2015 and in around 18 countries women’s conditions have worsened outright in recent years (). These include places ravaged by crises – Syria, Yemen, Myanmar, Venezuela – where instability disproportionately impacts women and girls (through surges in violence, loss of services, etc.), but also stable democracies where hard-won rights have been eroded by ideological shifts (the U.S. and Poland being key examples).
Government policies are a decisive factor in these trends. Where governments enact egalitarian policies – such as enforcing anti-discrimination laws, investing in girls’ education, providing maternal healthcare and childcare, and promoting women in power – women’s rights leap forward. We see this in countries like Spain or Canada, which have adopted “feminist” policy agendas, resulting in more women thriving. Conversely, state-driven backlash has been evident where populist or extremist regimes roll back rights as part of their platform (). The rise of what some call “anti-gender” movements (coalitions opposing what they label as “gender ideology,” often attacking LGBTQ+ and women’s rights together) in parts of Eastern Europe, Latin America, and even at the United Nations, has stalled progress and even reversed norms.
Societal attitudes and cultural norms, too, can either buttress or undermine women’s rights. In societies where patriarchal views remain strong, legal reforms might not fully take root. For instance, if a community believes a woman’s place is strictly in the home, it may matter little that the law now allows her to work or travel – she will face family and social pressure not to. There are concerning signs that in some places, attitudes are worsening: UN Women found that during COVID-19, young men in certain countries held more regressive views on gender roles than before, possibly a reaction to economic insecurity and shifting power dynamics () (). Combating these attitudes through education and awareness is as important as the laws themselves. Encouragingly, global youth movements and male ally initiatives are tackling harmful norms, promoting everything from men sharing housework to condemning violence against women.
International movements and solidarity remain vital. Global feminism is more interconnected than ever – what happens in one country inspires reactions in others. The outrage and activism in response to the U.S. abortion rollback, the Iranian women’s uprising, and the courage of Ukrainian women volunteering in war or Sudanese women leading protests, all cross borders via media and activism, galvanizing others. International frameworks like CEDAW, the SDGs, and the Beijing+25 reviews provide benchmarks and hold governments to account (or at least shame them). However, international cooperation has also faced hurdles recently, with some governments blocking consensus on women’s rights language in UN forums. This makes the role of civil society and transnational advocacy all the more crucial.
In conclusion, the world is at a tenuous juncture for women’s rights. We are not uniformly experiencing an era of regression – in many places, progress is ongoing and even accelerating. Yet it is equally true that hard-won rights can no longer be taken for granted, and in several countries women are seeing their freedoms shrink. The narrative is one of both inspiring advances and urgent warnings. As the Equal Measures 2030 report noted, if current trends continue, gender equality may actually worsen, which would be “shocking” and “shortsighted” for humanity’s future () (). The implications of that are profound: gender equality is not a zero-sum game but a foundation for prosperity, peace, and sustainability. Studies show that empowering women boosts economies, improves health and education outcomes, and leads to more stable societies (). Conversely, suppressing women’s rights tends to foretell broader democratic backsliding and conflict.
Therefore, whether we are in a “regressive period” depends on how we respond now. The current warning signs – from courts overturning rights in the U.S., to militants denying girls education in Afghanistan, to sluggish progress in closing pay and political gaps – should serve as a rallying call. Policymakers, activists, and communities must reassert the importance of gender equality, reinvest in women’s advancement, and resist rollbacks. Examples of resilience abound: American voters countering anti-abortion measures, brave Iranian women continuing protests for liberty, coalitions of nations and NGOs funding reproductive health in defiance of gag rules. The path forward will require vigilance and solidarity across borders. If there is one clear lesson from this global analysis, it is that women’s rights are neither guaranteed nor self-sustaining – they must be continuously defended and advanced, or they can indeed regress. As we move further into the 21st century, the hope is that the apparent regressions are but temporary setbacks that spur a stronger, more inclusive push toward genuine equality for all women, in all aspects of life, around the world.
Sources: Human Rights Watch () (); World Bank () (); World Economic Forum (); Inter-Parliamentary Union (); United Nations & UN Women () (); Equal Measures 2030 (); World Health Organization (); Guttmacher Institute (); McKinsey Global Institute (); Chatham House (); Reuters/RFERL (); UNICEF (); and various academic and governmental reports.
America's abortion ban will hurt women everywhere | Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank
Would you like to adjust or expand any sections before I begin drafting the report?
✅ Final Outline: Global State of Women’s Rights – Progress or Regression?
A 5-Part Series on Legal Gains, Cultural Setbacks, and the Fight for Equality
Day 1 – Legal Rights, Global Backsliding & Authoritarian Threats
Title: Are Women’s Rights Regressing? A Global Reality Check
🔹 Core Themes:
Day 2 – Reproductive Autonomy, Maternal Health & Bodily Integrity
Title: Who Controls Women’s Bodies? Abortion, Birth, and the Fight for Autonomy
🔹 Core Themes:
Day 3 – Economic Inequality, Labor Exploitation & Workforce Disparities
Title: The Price of Progress: How the Global Economy Exploits Women’s Labor
🔹 Core Themes:
Day 4 – Political Power, Violence & Cultural Control
Title: Power, Punishment, and Control: Why Equality in Public Life Remains Elusive
🔹 Core Themes:
Day 5 – The U.S. and Global Influence on Women’s Rights
Title: When America Falls Behind, the World Pays Attention: U.S. Policy and Global Impact
🔹 Core Themes:
🔗 Sidebar or Visual Feature (Suggested for Full Report or Social Companion)
“📍 Where the Far Right = Regression for Women”
✅ 1. Add a Short Section to Day 5: Anti-Gender Movement at the U.N.
Here’s a draft of what we’ll add near the end of Day 5:
🔎 The Rise of the “Anti-Gender” Movement
In recent years, an international coalition of conservative governments, religious institutions, and far-right organizations has emerged to oppose what they call “gender ideology.” This loosely coordinated movement—often referred to as the “anti-gender” campaign—has actively worked to roll back women’s rights, LGBTQ+ protections, and sexual education policies.
At the U.N. and other international forums, countries like Russia, Saudi Arabia, Poland, Hungary, and Brazil (under Bolsonaro) have blocked or watered down gender equality language in treaties and resolutions. These governments often frame gender equity as a “Western imposition” or threat to “traditional family values,” using it to justify policies that limit bodily autonomy, repress queer and trans people, and silence feminist advocacy.
The anti-gender backlash is not fringe—it’s gaining traction in global diplomacy and legal reform processes, shaping everything from abortion access to education. The U.S., once a counterweight, has become part of the contradiction: a key funder of women’s rights abroad, while regressing on them at home.
We’ll tie it into the broader point: that gender equality is not just under attack domestically—it’s under coordinated, ideological siege at the international level.
🗺️ 2. Include a Visual Sidebar or Map in the Report/Series
Title idea: “Where the Far Right = Regression for Women”
Visual Map/Table Key:
Table 2
Country
Far-Right/Authoritarian Leadership
Women’s Rights Impact
Afghanistan
Taliban (Islamist Theocracy)
Total collapse of legal/personhood rights for women
Poland
Law & Justice Party
Abortion ban, LGBTQ+ repression, judicial rollback
Hungary
Viktor Orbán
Gender studies banned, anti-LGBTQ+ laws
Brazil
Bolsonaro (2019–2022)
Attacks on feminism, cuts to DV programs
Russia
Putin (Authoritarian Nationalism)
DV decriminalized, anti-feminist media campaigns
Turkey
Erdoğan (Authoritarian Conserv.)
Istanbul Convention withdrawal, rising femicide
U.S.
Trump Era + Dobbs decision
Roe reversed, rise in anti-feminist, anti-trans bills
Saudi Arabia
Absolute Monarchy
Reforms surface-level; deep gender hierarchy remains
There are no rows in this table
Would you like this visual to be:
🧔♂️ 3. Do We Talk About Pro-Male Movements? Not Yet—But We Should
You’re right—this is a major vector of regression, especially among youth. Here’s where we can integrate it:
Add to Day 4 (Political Power & Social Control):
🧠 Pro-Male and “Men’s Rights” Movements
The rise of online "men’s rights" and “alpha male” influencers—often rooted in resentment toward feminism—has led to a new wave of gender backlash. Platforms like TikTok and YouTube are saturated with content that paints gender equality as a threat, promotes dominance over women, and spreads misinformation about consent, abuse, and reproductive rights.
These movements fuel hostility toward women in politics, education, and leadership—while reinforcing the idea that feminism is to blame for male economic or social decline. They're not just fringe—they’re shaping cultural attitudes, especially among disaffected young men, and feeding into the larger anti-gender backlash seen across governments and institutions.
We can name names (e.g., Andrew Tate), explain how this content spreads, and connect it back to broader political regression and violence.
🔚 Summary of What We’re Now Including:
Ready to move forward with drafting? I can start building Day 1 and prep the map visual alongside it. Let me know how you’d like to proceed!
The Gender Divide: Democracy, Backlash, and the Future of Rights
Day 1 – Are Women’s Rights Regressing? A Global Reality Check
For centuries, women around the world have organized, advocated, and resisted to secure greater autonomy, equality, and dignity. While the modern women’s rights movement is often associated with 20th-century milestones, its origins stretch back far earlier—and its trajectory reflects a complex interplay of social, legal, economic, and political transformations across time and geography.
🇺🇸 In the United States
The women’s rights movement in the United States has unfolded across several historical periods, each characterized by distinctive demands, strategies, and achievements.
The long nineteenth century witnessed the earliest coordinated efforts for gender equality. The 1848 Seneca Falls Convention marked the formal beginning of organized advocacy, articulating women’s claims to legal and political rights, most notably the right to vote. Activists such as Sojourner Truth, Susan B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton laid essential groundwork for the suffrage campaign. Although the movement spanned decades, it culminated in a landmark victory in 1920 with the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which guaranteed women the right to vote nationally.
The mid-20th century ushered in the second wave of feminism, informed by postwar realities and the civil rights movement. Women demanded not only legal recognition but also economic opportunity and bodily autonomy. This era saw transformative legislative achievements: the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (1964), and Title IX (1972), which addressed discrimination in employment and education. The 1973 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade expanded reproductive rights, while organizations like the National Organization for Women (NOW) and the emergence of feminist media shaped public discourse.
By the late 20th and early 21st centuries, women had made significant gains in professional fields, politics, and education. Yet persistent inequality and systemic barriers remained. The #MeToo movement, launched in 2017, revealed the pervasiveness of sexual harassment and violence, catalyzing global conversations about power and accountability. Despite this momentum, key legislative goals such as the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) remain unfulfilled.
In recent years, a resurgence of conservative legal and political forces has posed new challenges. The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) overturned federal abortion protections, reversing a cornerstone of reproductive autonomy. Online misogyny, anti-feminist rhetoric, and the criminalization of self-defense among survivors of violence have also contributed to a concerning pattern of regression.
Today, American women are more politically active, highly educated, and socially engaged than at any point in history. Yet the legal and cultural foundations of equality remain deeply contested.
🌍 International Developments
Globally, the women’s rights movement has taken diverse forms, shaped by region-specific histories, colonial legacies, religious traditions, and economic conditions. Nevertheless, a number of global patterns have emerged over the 20th and 21st centuries.
International instruments and frameworks have played a critical role. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), adopted in 1979, remains the most comprehensive treaty on gender equality, although it has not been ratified by the United States. The Beijing Platform for Action, adopted in 1995, provided a bold global agenda for women’s empowerment across education, health, violence prevention, and political participation.
Many countries have made measurable gains in women’s literacy, school enrollment, and representation in government. Legal protections against domestic violence, gender-based discrimination, and child marriage have expanded across regions. In Latin America, a vibrant feminist movement—known as the “Green Wave”—has led to the decriminalization or legalization of abortion in countries such as Argentina, Mexico, and Colombia.
Key areas of progress:
However, these gains have not been universal, nor are they secure. In Afghanistan, the return of Taliban rule has resulted in the near-total erasure of women from public life. In Poland and El Salvador, abortion is nearly entirely banned. Even in countries with strong legal protections, customary or religious legal systems continue to undermine women’s autonomy—particularly in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and the Middle East.
A growing “anti-gender” movement—often backed by far-right governments and religious institutions—has emerged as a powerful force globally. This movement seeks to roll back advances in sexual and reproductive health, LGBTQ+ rights, and gender education under the guise of protecting “traditional values.”
The digital landscape has further complicated the fight for equality. While social media has enabled rapid mobilization and cross-border solidarity, it has also facilitated the spread of online misogyny, disinformation, and targeted harassment. Influencers and networks that promote pro-male extremism have garnered massive followings, particularly among young men, contributing to an alarming cultural backlash.
🔄 The Movement Today: Interconnected, Intergenerational, and Globally Engaged
Despite mounting challenges, the global women’s rights movement is marked by resilience, adaptability, and innovation. Women are organizing across continents, ideologies, and generations—often leveraging digital tools to build coalitions, demand accountability, and reshape cultural narratives.
Youth-led campaigns are leading the charge in areas like climate justice, anti-violence work, and democratic reform. Feminist movements in the Global South are asserting their leadership, challenging Western-centric frameworks, and redefining what gender justice looks like in their own contexts.
Contemporary activism is characterized by both global solidarity and local specificity. Movements such as #MeToo, the Green Wave, and international protests against femicide have shown how grassroots efforts can transcend borders while staying rooted in community realities.
Digital platforms—despite their risks—have provided unprecedented visibility and connectivity. Feminist organizers have used them to document abuses, share resources, fundraise, and educate at scale.
The women’s rights movement today is not monolithic. It is a mosaic of intersecting struggles grounded in a shared pursuit of equity, dignity, and freedom. As reactionary forces seek to undo decades of progress, the task ahead is twofold: resist regression, and build systems that do not merely include women—but are transformed by them.
The arc of progress is real. But it is not inevitable. It must be defended, reimagined, and advanced by each generation in turn.
🔁 2025: A Global Inflection Point
But in 2025, that story is shifting—and not in the direction many had hoped.
Across the globe, hard-won legal rights for women are being rolled back, ignored, or eroded. In some countries, this regression has taken the form of sweeping, explicit reversals. In others, it manifests more subtly—through the undermining of enforcement, the persistence of discriminatory norms, or the slow erosion of political will. What unites these diverse examples is the growing influence of far-right, authoritarian, and religious nationalist movements that increasingly view gender equality as a threat to be neutralized.
This is not merely a stall in progress—it is an orchestrated backlash. And the consequences are far-reaching.
🔍 What Are “Legal Rights” for Women?
When we talk about women’s legal rights, we are referring to the foundational protections and entitlements that enable autonomy and participation in society. These include:
In principle, many of these rights are now recognized in law across most countries. Yet recognition on paper does not guarantee realization in practice. The implementation and protection of these rights vary dramatically across regions—and within countries—often shaped by political priorities, judicial independence, social norms, and resource constraints.
Even in the United States, until the 1970s, women in many states could not rent an apartment, apply for a mortgage, or sign a lease without a male guarantor—often a husband or father. This recent history underscores how newly won some rights still are—and how vulnerable they remain in the face of coordinated political and cultural backlash.
⚖️ Customary Law Still Overrides Formal Law in Many Places
In rural and conservative communities across Africa, South Asia, and the Middle East, customary or religious laws often override statutory law. That means even where national constitutions guarantee equality, women are still governed by informal systems that reinforce male control.
The gap between legal reform and cultural enforcement is wide—and growing wider when legal systems themselves weaken under political pressure.
The Infantilization of Women: A Structural Form of Gender Control
Across cultures and institutions, women have long been subjected to a form of systemic diminishment that is less visible than outright violence but equally insidious: infantilization. This social and political dynamic treats women not as full adults, but as beings perpetually in need of supervision, protection, or correction. The result is a kind of gendered stratification in which society operates not on a binary of male and female, but on a hierarchy that mirrors age and authority: men, women, and children.
In this framework, adult women are often placed closer to children than to men in terms of perceived competence, autonomy, and credibility. They are managed, second-guessed, and excluded from full participation on the basis of a presumed vulnerability or emotional fragility. This infantilization is not just cultural—it is encoded into law, policy, media, and medicine.
Historically, legal systems reflected and reinforced this hierarchy. In many countries, women were treated as legal minors under the authority of their fathers or husbands, unable to own property, enter contracts, or travel without permission. While many of these laws have formally been repealed, their underlying logic persists in contemporary systems. For example:
The consequences are wide-ranging. Infantilization undermines women’s access to reproductive autonomy, financial independence, political leadership, and even basic credibility in public discourse. It also reinforces social expectations that women should be protected, guided, or corrected—rather than respected, believed, or empowered.
This construct is also evident in media and marketing, where adult women are routinely portrayed with childlike features: high-pitched voices, exaggerated innocence, and dependence on male validation. Simultaneously, assertive or ambitious women are labeled as aggressive, “too much,” or emotionally unstable—terms rarely applied to men in similar roles.
Crucially, infantilization shapes public policy. Debates over abortion, parental leave, workplace accommodations, and even school dress codes are often rooted in the belief that women cannot be trusted to make decisions for themselves—or must be shielded from the consequences of those decisions.
Understanding infantilization as a structural form of gender control helps clarify why so many women’s rights battles are not simply about inclusion, but about recognition of full adulthood. Until women are universally treated as autonomous adults with the same intellectual, legal, and moral standing as men, true equality will remain out of reach.
In redefining gender justice, we must reject frameworks that blur the line between womanhood and childhood. Empowerment cannot exist in a system that continues to cast women as developmentally incomplete, dependent, or incapable of full agency.
🚨 What Backsliding Looks Like🚨
Let’s be clear: women’s rights are not just stalling—they are being reversed in multiple countries. And these reversals are not accidental; they are part of broader ideological projects that seek to reassert patriarchal authority through law, religion, nationalism, and cultural norms.
Here are some of the clearest examples of modern-day regression:
These are not fringe developments. They represent a coordinated effort to push women out of decision-making roles, out of public visibility, and out of control over their own lives. Legal and policy instruments are being weaponized to discipline, contain, and silence women—often under the banner of tradition, nationalism, or religious morality.
Understanding what backsliding looks like is essential to resisting it. These trends remind us that rights are never guaranteed. They must be actively defended—and reimagined—in every generation, and in every place where gender justice remains unfinished.
🧨 The Rise of the Far Right—and the Attack on Gender
The resurgence of far-right and authoritarian movements worldwide has been one of the defining political shifts of the early 21st century. What marks these movements is not just nationalism or xenophobia, but a profound fixation on gender roles, the family, and reproductive control. Gender equality, in this context, is not a side issue—it is a central battleground.
In Hungary, Viktor Orbán’s government banned gender studies and embedded a rigid binary definition of gender in the constitution. In Brazil, former president Jair Bolsonaro routinely referred to feminism as a cultural threat and slashed funding for women’s healthcare. In the United States, the reversal of Roe v. Wade fulfilled a decades-long promise to restore “family values” by limiting reproductive autonomy. These are not isolated developments. They reflect a deeper ideological project—what political theorist Corey Robin calls “the reactionary mind.”
🔍 Understanding the Reactionary Mind
Reactionary movements are not merely nostalgic—they are animated by a belief that modernity has gone too far. Feminism, queer rights, secularism, and multiculturalism are seen as corrosive forces undermining a natural (and often divinely ordained) social order. What unites many of these movements is a shared perception that society has lost its moral center—and that the family is the last institution capable of restoring it.
Thus, gender becomes both symbol and strategy. It serves as a proxy for larger anxieties about cultural change, demographic shifts, and the erosion of patriarchal authority. The need to control and define gender—to fix it in law, biology, and culture—is not incidental. It is core to the far-right vision of order.
🧠 Why the Backlash, Why Now?
The timing of this backlash is no accident. The past two decades have seen:
These developments have shifted public consciousness and policy in ways that deeply unsettle conservative ideologues. In response, far-right leaders have mobilized fears of decline—economic, cultural, and moral. They appeal to a vision of a lost golden age: one in which men led, women nurtured, and families reproduced a stable, hierarchical society.
The appeal of this vision grows stronger in moments of crisis. Economic inequality, war, climate anxiety, and migration all heighten a desire for control and simplicity. Gender becomes a scapegoat for disorder—and feminism a target for repression.
👪 The Family as Ideological Fortress
At the heart of the far right’s political theology is the idealized family: heterosexual, reproductive, patriarchal. It is cast as the foundation of civilization and the antidote to modern chaos. As such, it must be protected—through policy, policing, and propaganda.
This is why:
In this logic, to question the family is to question the nation itself. And to be a feminist—or queer, or trans—is to be inherently suspect.
🌍 The Global “Anti-Gender” Campaign
What began as isolated national policies has evolved into a coordinated transnational effort. At institutions like the United Nations and the European Union, countries such as Russia, Hungary, Saudi Arabia, Poland, and previously the U.S. have worked together to undermine gender equality language, stall human rights negotiations, and reshape international norms.
This coalition promotes a narrative of “gender ideology” as a Western, imperialist imposition. It seeks to:
This “anti-gender” movement is not a fringe conspiracy—it is a well-resourced, diplomatically organized backlash. And it is eroding the hard-won gains of decades of feminist and queer activism on the world stage.
🔗 When Race and Gender Collide: Black Women as the Ultimate Threat
In the worldview of the far right, the combination of race and gender is particularly combustible—and politically catalytic.
Black women occupy a unique—and threatening—position in the reactionary imagination. They represent the intersection of two domains the far right seeks to dominate: racial hierarchy and gender subordination.
Black women have historically been leaders in movements for justice, from civil rights and reproductive freedom to labor organizing and political resistance. Their visibility and influence challenge both patriarchal and white supremacist power structures.
Consequently, Black women are frequently cast as villains: ungovernable, emasculating, morally suspect, or culturally corrosive. They are targeted as welfare queens, angry disruptors, and bad mothers—tropes designed to justify surveillance, punishment, and political exclusion.
This obsession is not incidental. The far-right need to control Black women arises from their symbolic role as evidence of a social order that defies white, male dominance. To suppress Black women’s voices is to suppress the possibility of a future built on justice, solidarity, and liberation.
This dynamic has been especially visible in the United States. The rise of Kamala Harris to the vice presidency—the first woman, the first Black American, and the first South Asian American to hold the office—provoked an immediate and visceral backlash from right-wing media and political figures. Much like the election of Barack Obama in 2008, Harris’s ascent symbolized a disruption of long-held hierarchies and evoked fears of demographic and cultural change. As the 2024 election approaches, attacks on Harris have intensified, often couched in racialized and gendered terms that question her legitimacy, ambition, and authority. Her very presence on the national stage has become a lightning rod for reactionary narratives, reinforcing how deeply the far right is invested in controlling not just policy, but the face of power itself.
🛡 What’s at Stake
This global assault on gender equality is about more than identity politics—it is about power: who holds it, who defines the future, and who is silenced in the process. By targeting gender and race simultaneously, the far right aims to redraw the boundaries of citizenship, belonging, and legitimacy.
To resist this wave of authoritarianism, gender and racial justice cannot be treated as separate issues or secondary concerns. They are foundational to democracy, pluralism, and human rights. The battle over gender and race is not a distraction—it is a defining struggle of our time.
References
🧭 Where We Go from Here
Understanding the regression in women’s rights starts with a clear-eyed analysis of the legal, cultural, and ideological foundations being dismantled in real time. The far right’s attacks on gender are not symbolic—they are tactical. And their success depends on dismantling institutional protections, eroding public trust, and stoking fear.
In the next section, we turn our attention to the body itself: how the fight over reproductive autonomy, maternal health, and access to care reveals who truly has control over women’s lives—and who is systematically being left behind.
Day 2 – Who Controls Women’s Bodies? Abortion, Birth, and the Fight for Autonomy
Reproductive Autonomy and the Politics of the Body
If you want to understand where women stand in society, look at who controls their bodies. Reproductive autonomy—the ability to decide whether, when, and how to have children—is one of the most fundamental expressions of freedom. Without it, no other right is fully secure.
Control over reproduction is about more than medical care or family planning—it is about sovereignty, citizenship, and power. The ability to decide what happens to one’s body shapes everything from education and employment to civic participation and safety. When that control is undermined or denied, women are rendered politically and economically vulnerable.
Today, women’s bodily autonomy is under sustained and strategic assault. From the denial of abortion care to preventable maternal deaths and forced pregnancies, the battle over reproductive rights reveals the global fault lines of inequality, ideology, and authoritarian control. Reproductive justice—first articulated by Black feminists in the United States—is not just about the right to abortion, but about the right to have children, the right not to have children, and the right to raise children in safe and sustainable communities. That framework is more relevant than ever.
Around the world, the terms of this fight are shifting. In some countries, grassroots movements have forced dramatic gains. In others, governments have stripped rights and criminalized care. What emerges is a fragmented global landscape where geography, class, race, and religion determine whether reproductive freedom is protected—or punished.
🩸 Abortion Access: Expanding and Regressing—at the Same Time
In the past two decades, more than 60 countries have moved to expand access to abortion—a quiet revolution of progress. In Latin America, the feminist “Green Wave” has toppled long-standing bans in Argentina, Mexico, and Colombia. These victories were unthinkable just a decade ago, signaling a shift in both public opinion and legal frameworks.
But at the same time, a few countries have dramatically reversed course:
This regression is not just about policy—it’s about power. It’s about redefining who has the right to autonomy, whose life is valued, and who gets to decide the terms of reproductive health. And it has life-or-death consequences.
🧬 The Cost of Denial: Unsafe Abortions and Maternal Mortality
When legal abortion is unavailable, abortion doesn’t stop—it just becomes unsafe.
Globally, nearly 7 million women are hospitalized every year due to complications from unsafe abortions. The World Health Organization reports that these procedures remain one of the leading causes of maternal injury and death, particularly in countries with poor access to contraception or healthcare.
Even where abortion remains technically legal, practical access can be hollowed out by clinic closures, targeted harassment, mandatory waiting periods, and narrow legal exceptions. In parts of sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, legal rights exist—but they are out of reach for rural, poor, and marginalized women.
In the United States, doctors in restrictive states report delaying treatment for miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies—putting lives at risk as legal confusion creates medical paralysis and fear of prosecution. In Texas, recent maternal mortality review data show that the state’s maternal mortality rate remains among the highest in the nation, with preventable deaths linked directly to delays in obstetric care. Black women in Texas face a maternal mortality rate more than twice that of white women, a disparity compounded by limited access to reproductive services in the wake of abortion restrictions.
A 2023 report by the Texas Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee found that unsafe or delayed care for pregnancy complications—including ectopic pregnancies and miscarriage—was a contributing factor in multiple maternal deaths. Physicians have described a chilling legal atmosphere in which they hesitate to provide timely care for fear of violating restrictive abortion laws. This not only threatens patients’ lives but has also caused staffing shortages in OB-GYN services across rural hospitals.
The ripple effects of these policies are being felt throughout the healthcare system—deepening racial inequities, endangering patients, and eroding trust in the institutions meant to preserve life.
⚠️ Unmet Need for Contraception: The Silent Emergency
Globally, 218 million women who want to avoid pregnancy still lack access to modern contraceptive methods. This gap contributes to high rates of unintended pregnancy, unsafe abortion, and maternal death—especially in regions with fragile health systems.
Education and access matter. Where women have both, fertility rates drop, maternal health outcomes improve, and women gain greater control over their economic, social, and political lives.
🏥 The U.S. Maternal Mortality Crisis: Systemic Failures and Racial Disparities
The United States stands alone among high-income countries for its consistently high—and in recent years, rising—maternal mortality rate. While most nations have seen steady improvements in maternal health outcomes, the U.S. saw its maternal mortality rate more than double between 2018 and 2021, peaking at 32.9 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2021.
Although provisional 2022 data showed a slight decline (22.3 per 100,000), the long-term trend remains deeply troubling. The causes of these deaths are overwhelmingly preventable: CDC review panels estimate that over 80% of pregnancy-related deaths in the U.S. could have been avoided.
These deaths are not distributed equally. Black women are nearly three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women, regardless of income, education, or geographic location. In 2021, the maternal mortality rate for Black women reached 69.9 deaths per 100,000 live births, compared to 26.6 for white women. Indigenous women also face unacceptably high and rising maternal mortality rates.
The primary causes of maternal death in the U.S. include:
• Cardiovascular complications
• Hemorrhage
• Infection and sepsis
• Thrombotic embolism
• Mental health conditions, including substance use disorder and suicide
These health conditions are compounded by social and systemic barriers—lack of postpartum care, insurance gaps, transportation difficulties, provider bias, and hospital closures, particularly in rural and underserved communities.
Preliminary reports since 2022 suggest that abortion bans and legal uncertainty are worsening maternal care. In states like Texas, Idaho, and Mississippi, doctors have reported delaying or denying life-saving care due to confusion over abortion laws. Hospitals in restrictive states face growing OB-GYN staffing shortages, leaving vast areas without basic obstetric services. These delays and systemic barriers may not yet be fully captured in national mortality statistics, but their consequences are already visible on the ground.
📉 Preliminary Observations: Post-Dobbs Trends in 2024–2025
While national maternal mortality data for 2024 and 2025 have yet to be released by the CDC, a growing body of preliminary evidence suggests that abortion restrictions are having a measurable impact on maternal health—particularly in states with the most severe bans.
• In Texas, Idaho, and Mississippi, OB-GYNs have reported delays in treating miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies due to fear of violating abortion bans. These delays have led to near-miss maternal emergencies, with patients only receiving care after their lives were in critical danger.
• A 2024 Health Affairs study documented a chilling effect on emergency obstetric care, especially in rural hospitals, where legal ambiguity around abortion has deterred timely interventions.
• Staffing shortages in obstetric units are worsening, as physicians relocate from states with strict bans to avoid potential legal liability or ethical conflicts. This has exacerbated maternity care deserts, particularly in the South and Midwest.
• According to the Guttmacher Institute, more than a dozen states have now reported clinics turning away patients in urgent need of pregnancy care, citing legal risks or lack of capacity.
These outcomes, while not yet reflected in finalized national data, suggest that the post-Dobbs landscape is not only reshaping access to abortion—but also undermining the basic safety and continuity of pregnancy care. The full public health toll may not be understood for years, but early indicators point to a growing maternal health crisis driven as much by legal chaos as by clinical risk.
At a global level, the U.S. now has the highest maternal mortality rate among peer nations, despite spending more per capita on healthcare than any other country. This is not just a public health failure—it is a reflection of deep structural inequities and policy choices that devalue women’s health, especially for Black and Brown communities.
Reproductive autonomy is not an isolated issue—it is foundational to all others. In the next section, we explore how maternal health, healthcare infrastructure, and social inequality further shape who survives pregnancy, who is supported in parenting, and who is left behind.
💥 The Fallout of Forced Birth: Unwanted Pregnancies and Their Impact on Families
Much of the conversation around abortion bans focuses on legality—but what happens after someone is forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy? The social, psychological, and economic costs of forced birth are immense, and they reverberate not just through individual lives, but through entire communities and public systems.
Unwanted pregnancies disproportionately affect those who already face structural disadvantage: young people, low-income women, Black and Brown communities, people in rural areas, and survivors of violence. The consequences extend well beyond the delivery room.
🔹 Pregnancies Resulting from Rape and Assault
One of the starkest outcomes of post-Dobbs policies is the denial of care to survivors of sexual violence. According to CDC data, 1 in 9 women of reproductive age in the U.S. has experienced rape that resulted in pregnancy. Yet in many states with near-total abortion bans—including Texas, Missouri, and Arkansas—there are no exceptions for rape or incest.
This means survivors may be legally required to carry pregnancies conceived through violence, often while navigating trauma, stigma, and lack of support. It is a profound form of state-imposed control over the bodies of people who have already been violated.
🔹 A Foster System Already at Capacity
Opponents of abortion often suggest adoption as an alternative—but the U.S. child welfare system paints a different picture. As of 2022, more than 390,000 children were in foster care, many of them entering the system due to neglect, poverty, or parental incarceration.
• States with strict abortion bans—such as Mississippi and Texas—also have some of the highest rates of child poverty and the lowest investment in foster care services.
• In practice, only a small fraction of women with unwanted pregnancies choose adoption. Most are raising children under constrained and unsupported conditions.
By forcing birth without investing in the infrastructure to support children and families, these policies do not value life—they merely control reproduction.
🔹 The Economic Toll of Denying Abortion
The Turnaway Study, a landmark longitudinal research project, found that women who were denied an abortion were significantly more likely to live in poverty, experience unemployment, stay in abusive relationships, and struggle with food and housing insecurity compared to those who received care.
• The lifetime cost of raising a child in the U.S. exceeds $300,000—not including healthcare, housing, and educational costs.
• Yet most states with abortion bans do not guarantee paid leave, universal childcare, or basic income supports for new parents.
• Women denied abortions are also less likely to complete college, less likely to pursue desired career paths, and more likely to suffer long-term financial instability.
For those already on the economic margins, forced birth deepens inequality and traps families in cycles of precarity.
🔹 Intergenerational Impact
The effects of unwanted pregnancy ripple across generations. Children born as a result of denied abortions are more likely to live in poverty, face unstable housing, and have lower educational outcomes. Their mothers are more likely to experience chronic stress, postpartum depression, and long-term financial hardship.
In essence, the fallout of forced birth is not just about reproductive injustice—it’s about economic disempowerment, public health degradation, and state-sponsored harm that affects entire families and communities.
💀 The Global Maternal Health Divide
The state of maternal health worldwide reflects how societies value women’s lives—not just rhetorically, but in concrete investment, infrastructure, and political will.
• Globally, 287,000 women die every year from complications of pregnancy and childbirth. Nearly 95% of these deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries, and almost all are preventable with timely access to skilled care and emergency services.
• In sub-Saharan Africa, maternal mortality remains staggeringly high, accounting for roughly two-thirds of global maternal deaths. Conflict zones such as Sudan, South Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo face compounded challenges: collapsed infrastructure, displacement, and targeted attacks on healthcare facilities.
• In South Asia, countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan struggle with low rates of skilled birth attendance, especially in rural areas. Traditional practices, gender-based restrictions, and lack of health literacy further endanger maternal survival.
• Even in high-income countries, disparities persist. The United States has the highest maternal mortality rate among peer nations, with severe racial disparities: Black women are nearly three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women.
In Afghanistan, maternal health has entered a humanitarian freefall. Since the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, the collapse of the health system has left millions without access to even basic reproductive care. Female doctors and midwives have been expelled from hospitals, clinics have shuttered, and aid organizations face severe restrictions. Women are now forced to give birth at home, often without medical assistance—reviving conditions that global public health had spent decades trying to overcome.
Meanwhile, climate disasters, war, and political instability are compounding maternal health risks worldwide. Women in regions affected by droughts, floods, and displacement are often last to receive food, medical aid, or transport—yet are first to bear caregiving burdens, including during childbirth.
Ultimately, maternal mortality is not just a health indicator—it is a moral and political one. It reflects whether women’s pain is believed, whether their lives are prioritized, and whether their autonomy is treated as essential to human flourishing.
✂️ FGM, Forced Birth, and Bodily Control
Reproductive oppression goes beyond the right to abortion—it includes a wide spectrum of practices that seek to control female bodies, often beginning in childhood and continuing across a woman’s lifespan.
In more than 30 countries, female genital mutilation (FGM) remains widespread, despite decades of international pressure, public health warnings, and national bans. An estimated 200 million women and girls alive today have undergone FGM, often before the age of 15. These procedures are frequently performed without anesthesia, by non-medical personnel, and in unsanitary conditions. The consequences—chronic pain, infections, complications in childbirth, and psychological trauma—can last a lifetime.
While FGM is often framed as a cultural issue, it is fundamentally about control—ensuring a girl’s “purity,” policing her sexuality, and reinforcing male ownership of female bodies.
In other communities, childbirth is not a choice—it is a social mandate. Child marriage, still legal in some form in over 90 countries, forces girls into early motherhood at great risk to their health and autonomy. In South Asia, West Africa, and parts of the Middle East, millions of girls are married before the age of 18. Many are pulled from school, isolated from support systems, and denied any say in when—or whether—they become mothers.
Even outside the context of FGM and child marriage, bodily control is often institutionalized. From mandatory virginity tests, to forced sterilizations, to coerced contraception targeting poor women, disabled women, and women of color, governments and medical systems have historically exercised authority over female reproduction in ways rarely applied to men.
What’s changing now is the boldness and coordination of these efforts. Around the world, gender control is no longer hidden behind paternalistic rhetoric—it is being openly embraced by political movements that cast reproductive autonomy as a threat to tradition, nationhood, and religious identity.
This is not just about policy—it is about ideology. The battle over the body is a battle over power.
🧭 Where We Go from Here
The right to control one’s body is the foundation of all other rights. Without bodily autonomy, the promise of democracy, citizenship, and equality is hollow.
But women are pushing back—forcefully, strategically, and across borders. In Argentina, Mexico, and Colombia, feminist movements have forced courts and legislatures to decriminalize abortion. In the United States, voters in Kansas, Ohio, and Michigan have mobilized to protect reproductive rights at the ballot box. In Afghanistan, women defy Taliban restrictions by organizing underground schools, medical support networks, and acts of public protest—at immense personal risk.
These struggles are not isolated—they are interconnected. They remind us that reproductive rights are not static gains; they are constantly contested, and must be vigilantly defended.
In the next section, we turn to the global economy—and examine how women’s labor is often exploited, underpaid, and devalued. Because while legal and health rights are essential, economic power is what enables women to leave abusive relationships, support their families, and imagine different futures.
Day 3 – The Price of Progress: How the Global Economy Exploits Women’s Labor
Labor, Wealth, and the Gendered Economy
Legal equality and reproductive autonomy are essential—but they mean little if women lack economic power. Across the globe, women’s ability to make decisions about their lives is shaped not just by laws or rights, but by access to income, control over labor, and freedom from economic exploitation. These are the cornerstones of independence, yet in almost every society, they remain elusive for many women.
From informal markets to boardrooms, women are working—but disproportionately in roles that are underpaid, undervalued, and unprotected. They are essential to national economies and family survival alike, yet rarely receive the compensation or recognition they deserve. Whether in garment factories in Bangladesh, care jobs in the U.S. and Europe, or agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa, women’s labor powers the global economy. But the benefits of that labor often bypass them.
This inequality is not incidental—it is structural. It is built into how wages are set, how work is defined, and how society assigns value to labor traditionally done by women. It is reinforced by a global economy that depends on unpaid care work, precarious employment, and systemic barriers to ownership and leadership.
In this section, we examine how gendered labor hierarchies, pay gaps, and caregiving responsibilities shape the everyday realities of women around the world—and what it will take to create an economy that works for everyone.
💰 The Global Gender Pay Gap
Women around the world still earn less than men for work of equal value. According to UN Women, the average global gender pay gap remains around 23%—meaning women earn 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. The gap is even wider for Black women, Indigenous women, migrant workers, and mothers.
While women make up nearly 40% of the global workforce, they hold only 24% of managerial roles, and just 10% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women. In politics, media, and corporate leadership, the “glass ceiling” is reinforced by networks of privilege, lack of caregiving accommodations, and institutional bias.
Efforts to close the gap—such as pay transparency laws, equal pay audits, and quota systems—have shown promise but face significant resistance, especially in male-dominated industries and cultures where gender norms remain deeply entrenched.
🧕🏽 The Unpaid Labor Crisis: Motherhood as a Penalty
Beyond the wage gap lies another form of economic inequality: the burden of unpaid labor. Women spend an average of three to six more hours per day than men on unpaid work—cooking, cleaning, caring for children and elderly relatives.
According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), if unpaid care work were assigned a monetary value, it would represent at least 9% of global GDP—more than the entire tech industry. And yet this labor is invisible in most economic measures, unprotected by labor laws, and unsupported by public services.
This burden comes at a steep cost. The “motherhood penalty” refers to the lower earnings, reduced hiring prospects, and slower career advancement faced by women with children. Fathers, by contrast, often benefit from a “fatherhood bonus.”
In many countries:
In the United States, the situation is especially stark. It is the only high-income country without guaranteed paid parental leave at the federal level. This forces many women to return to work within weeks of childbirth—or drop out of the labor force entirely, with lasting financial consequences.
The devaluation of care work—and the lack of policies to support it—is one of the most significant barriers to gender equality. Until caregiving is recognized, redistributed, and supported, economic justice for women will remain out of reach.
🌍 Migrant Women: The Frontlines of Labor Exploitation 🌍
The most brutal labor exploitation often targets the most vulnerable: migrant women in informal, domestic, or care work. These women operate in the shadows of the global economy—providing essential services while being excluded from legal protections, union representation, and public visibility.
Migrant women are the backbone of care economies that refuse to recognize them. Their labor allows middle- and upper-class families to outsource caregiving, while the women themselves remain underpaid, overworked, and legally unprotected.
And yet, without them, the system would collapse. They embody the paradox of modern capitalism: essential but expendable. This invisibility is not accidental—it is a product of intersecting systems of gender, race, class, and citizenship status designed to extract labor without granting rights.
As global migration continues to rise, and care needs increase in aging societies, protecting migrant women workers will be one of the defining labor rights challenges of the century.
🦠 COVID-19 and the “She-cession”
The pandemic made a bad situation worse. Women were 1.8 times more likely than men to lose their jobs due to COVID-19 disruptions, particularly in service sectors, informal economies, and caregiving roles. These sectors—hospitality, domestic work, retail, and education—were disproportionately impacted by lockdowns, and they also happen to be dominated by women.
At the height of the pandemic, women globally lost more than 64 million jobs, resulting in $800 billion in lost income in 2020 alone, according to UN Women. The burden of school closures and overwhelmed health systems fell squarely on women, many of whom had to leave paid employment to care for children, elders, and sick relatives.
And while economic recovery has begun in many regions, it has been uneven and exclusionary. Women’s labor force participation has not returned to pre-pandemic levels in several countries, especially among mothers, older women, and women in informal work. The caregiving crisis that COVID exposed has not been resolved—it has simply been reabsorbed by women, often at great personal and financial cost.
Moreover, many governments responded to the crisis by prioritizing corporate bailouts and male-dominated industries, rather than investing in care infrastructure or gender-equitable recovery plans. Public spending on childcare, eldercare, and health services remains stagnant or in decline in many parts of the world.
The ILO warns that these setbacks could delay gender parity in the workforce by decades. In some regions, COVID may have permanently altered women’s labor participation trajectories—creating a “new normal” where part-time, precarious, and unpaid roles are even more entrenched.
📉 Economic Crises Fuel Cultural Backlash
Around the world, economic instability often triggers a return to conservative gender norms. When institutions falter and livelihoods are threatened, the temptation to retreat to traditional hierarchies intensifies. Gender becomes both a scapegoat and a political tool, used to channel anxieties about modernity, globalization, and loss of control.
• After the 2008 financial crash, right-wing populists rose to power across Europe and the Americas on promises to “restore the family” and “protect traditional values”—thinly veiled appeals to patriarchal norms. Policies that rolled back reproductive rights, defunded gender programs, and promoted stay-at-home motherhood became centerpieces of post-crisis recovery in some nations.
• During COVID-19, many governments prioritized business bailouts and stimulus packages for male-dominated industries like construction and manufacturing, while leaving caregiving infrastructure—nurseries, eldercare, school systems—grossly underfunded. This forced millions of women back into the home, not by law, but by economic necessity.
• In countries like India, Brazil, and Poland, conservative cultural backlash accompanied pandemic-era austerity, with religious and nationalist leaders calling for a return to “natural gender roles.” Feminist organizations and LGBTQ+ rights groups were defunded, surveilled, or painted as threats to national unity.
• Rising male unemployment—especially among working-class men in industries like manufacturing and mining—has fueled resentment, often redirected at women and queer people who are framed as taking up space or disrupting “natural” hierarchies. This sense of displacement is ripe for exploitation by demagogues promising a return to rigid, orderly gender roles.
The result is a perfect storm, where economic fear drives cultural regression—and gender becomes the battleground for broader ideological wars. In these moments, feminists and gender rights advocates are not only fighting for equality—they are defending the very possibility of pluralism, social progress, and inclusive democracy.
📚 Education ≠ Equality
Girls’ education has improved dramatically in the past 30 years. Today, more young women are finishing primary and secondary school, enrolling in universities, and excelling in academic achievement than ever before. In many regions, girls now outperform boys in basic literacy and educational attainment.
But education alone is not a guarantee of economic mobility or empowerment. The promise of education is often broken by the realities of the labor market.
• Women remain significantly underrepresented in STEM fields, where some of the highest-paying and fastest-growing careers are concentrated.
• Leadership pipelines are still male-dominated. Even in sectors where women make up the majority of entry-level workers (like healthcare or education), men are more likely to rise to executive roles.
• Cultural norms and workplace discrimination continue to shape women’s career paths. In many countries, women are steered toward “nurturing” or administrative roles—and penalized or ostracized for choosing careers deemed “too ambitious” or “too masculine.”
• Even highly educated women frequently face gendered hiring practices, pregnancy discrimination, and workplace harassment that limit their advancement or drive them out of male-dominated industries.
In short: access to school is no longer the ceiling. The barriers now lie in the transition from classroom to career. Until economic systems are restructured to match the ambitions, talents, and contributions of women, education will remain an incomplete promise.
🌟 Where We Go from Here
Some countries are showing what’s possible with bold, coordinated action:
• Iceland has mandated pay equity audits and enforces equal pay by law.
• Estonia provides more than a year of paid parental leave, with flexibility for both mothers and fathers.
• Spain and France have implemented wage transparency policies, encouraging companies to close pay gaps and report progress.
These are promising examples, but they remain exceptions. Most economies continue to treat gender equity as peripheral—a matter for human resources departments or election talking points, rather than a central measure of economic well-being.
To create truly inclusive economies, we need more than policy tweaks—we need a systemic transformation that:
• Values unpaid care work by integrating it into national budgets and labor statistics
• Protects migrant and informal workers, who often operate without contracts, healthcare, or legal recourse
• Enforces wage parity through proactive audits, legal mandates, and corporate accountability
• Centers economic policy around gender equity—not as an afterthought, but as a core driver of development and recovery
Because economic power isn’t just about money—it’s about freedom, safety, self-determination, and dignity. When women control their economic lives, they are better equipped to leave abusive relationships, care for their families, participate in politics, and shape the future.
In the next section, we’ll turn to the political sphere: exploring how women around the world are still fighting for basic safety, voice, and visibility in public life—and how backlash, violence, and exclusion continue to define the gender gap in power.
Day 4 – Power, Punishment, and Control: Why Equality in Public Life Remains Elusive
Power, Safety, and the Public Sphere
Women have gained ground in courts, classrooms, and clinics—but when it comes to power, the gap remains glaring.
Despite decades of advocacy, legislative reforms, and symbolic breakthroughs, women remain vastly underrepresented in positions of political and institutional authority. They are often sidelined, harassed, or punished for stepping into public life. And beyond formal leadership roles, their everyday freedom to speak, move, participate, or even exist in public space remains contested—and often policed.
Across the world, gender-based violence, online harassment, restrictive dress codes, and public shaming function not just as social problems, but as political strategies. These tools of control are designed to limit women’s visibility, credibility, and agency in the public sphere.
This isn’t a byproduct of inequality—it is one of its core mechanisms. The political marginalization and public disciplining of women is not incidental to how power operates—it is foundational to maintaining the status quo.
In this section, we explore how women are still denied access to power—not only through laws and institutions, but through surveillance, stigma, and systemic pushback. From parliaments to city streets, the struggle for gender equality is also a struggle for space, safety, and voice.
🏛 Still Not at the Table: Women in Politics
The right to vote and run for office was a historic breakthrough—but formal inclusion has not translated into equal political power. As of 2024, women hold only 27% of seats in national parliaments globally, and just 17 countrieshave women serving as heads of state or government. Even in countries with high overall representation, women are frequently sidelined into “soft” portfolios—education, culture, health, and social affairs—while men dominate ministries of finance, defense, foreign policy, and infrastructure.
This imbalance is not just symbolic. When women are absent from core power structures, policymaking reflects that absence. Budgets, laws, and priorities are shaped without the voices of those most affected by inequality, violence, and exclusion. Political decisions—from military spending to climate strategy—are made in rooms where gender equity is rarely centered.
And when women do ascend to office, they often face resistance that goes far beyond scrutiny. Backlash is systemic, strategic, and increasingly violent.
Even in liberal democracies, the patterns are similar. In the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States, women in public office—especially women of color—are disproportionately targeted with hate speech, misinformation, and security threats.
These attacks are not random—they are meant to send a message: you do not belong here. And without meaningful legal protection, party support, and cultural shift, women in politics remain vulnerable to being not just marginalized—but erased.
True political parity requires more than quotas. It demands a transformation of political culture: one that includes anti-harassment protections, fair media representation, access to campaign finance, and recognition of intersectional barriers that affect women differently depending on race, class, sexuality, and disability.
Political power is not neutral. It has always been gendered. And until that structure changes, inclusion will remain fragile—and incomplete.
🗳 Quotas Work—But Only with Accountability
Quotas are among the most effective tools for increasing women’s representation in politics—but they are only as powerful as the systems that support them. The countries with the highest percentages of women in national legislatures—Rwanda (61%), Mexico (50%), Senegal (43%), and Bolivia (50%)—did not get there by accident. They achieved it through legally mandated gender quotas, often embedded in constitutions or electoral laws.
But quotas are not magic. They work only when:
Without enforcement and accountability, quotas can backfire. Women may be recruited as tokens, denied meaningful roles, or left isolated in hostile political environments. In some cases, they are targeted more aggressively because they are seen as intruders in male-dominated spaces.
Quotas are a necessary intervention in unjust systems—but they must be backed by broader reforms to protect women, redistribute power, and normalize female leadership.
⚠️ The Ongoing Epidemic of Gender-Based Violence
It is impossible to talk about women’s political participation—or public participation at all—without acknowledging the scale of violence they face simply for being visible.
This violence doesn’t stay behind closed doors. It follows women into schools, workplaces, public transportation, and online platforms. It keeps them from running for office, attending protests, leading movements, or even walking safely in their own neighborhoods.
In some cases, the state itself becomes the perpetrator:
Violence is not just a symptom of gender inequality—it is one of its most enduring tools. It disciplines women who dare to speak, lead, or demand space. And unless it is addressed as a structural and political issue, not just a private one, no amount of formal equality can guarantee real freedom.
The presence of women in parliaments, on ballots, or in movements must be matched by laws that protect them, cultures that support them, and systems that hold perpetrators accountable. Without this, representation is a fragile victory—easily undermined by fear, silence, and impunity.
📵 Online Harassment and Digital Silencing
The internet was once celebrated as a new frontier for democratic participation and free expression. But for many women—especially those who speak publicly, challenge authority, or hold positions of influence—it has become a battleground.
This isn’t just virtual bullying. Digital violence has material consequences. It drives women offline. It discourages them from running for office, writing op-eds, leading movements, or even commenting publicly on social media. Many women self-censor to avoid being targeted. Others leave their fields entirely.
And it doesn’t end there. The digital landscape is also fueling the growth of a new, global misogyny movement—one that merges economic anxiety, racial resentment, and gender backlash into a potent ideological force.
🤖 The Rise of Pro-Male, Anti-Feminist Radicalization
A growing wave of pro-male “manosphere” influencers—from Andrew Tate to TikTok “alpha male” gurus—have built massive followings by turning misogyny into content. They frame feminism not as a movement for equality, but as a threat to men’s rightful dominance.
Their messages are simple, seductive, and algorithmically amplified:
Their audiences are disproportionately young men, many of whom feel dislocated by economic insecurity, cultural change, or social isolation. Platforms like YouTube, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), and TikTok funnel them into echo chambers where misogyny is normalized—and monetized.
This is not harmless online banter. It’s a pipeline to real-world violence:
What we are witnessing is the normalization of anti-women ideology as political speech, cultural critique, and even lifestyle branding. And it’s happening on platforms that profit from engagement—even when that engagement is rooted in hate.
Online spaces have become a new front in the battle for gender equality. If they are left unregulated and unaccountable, they risk becoming sites of radicalization that undermine democracy, fuel violence, and silence a generation of women.
🧕 Cultural Control and Surveillance of Women’s Bodies
In many parts of the world, a woman’s presence in public is still treated as a provocation—something to be managed, punished, or erased. What she wears, where she goes, and who she speaks to are not simply matters of personal choice, but sites of surveillance and contestation. This control comes not only from the state, but also from families, communities, and cultural institutions.
Whether enforced by authoritarian governments or liberal democracies, dress codes function as a mechanism of control. They signal who belongs in public space, who must justify their presence, and who is seen as a threat simply for existing.
At the root of these policies is a shared logic: that a woman’s body must be governed—either to protect cultural values, preserve male honor, or enforce uniformity. And that her autonomy must always be made conditional.
💪 Male Allyship and Cultural Transformation
Change is not only possible—it is already underway. And it is being driven not just by women and girls, but by communities working together to reshape the norms that limit them.
In regions long defined by patriarchal control, men are beginning to step into new roles—as allies, educators, and co-conspirators in gender justice:
These examples show that culture is not fixed. It is constantly made—and remade—by those who live it. When men understand that gender equality benefits entire communities—not just women—they become powerful agents of change.
Real transformation happens at the level of norms and relationships. It’s in who speaks up at the dinner table, who walks beside women at protests, and who calls out abuse in locker rooms, workplaces, and mosques.
Because undoing the control of women’s bodies isn’t just about dismantling laws—it’s about rebuilding trust, empathy, and solidarity from the ground up.
🧭 Where We Go from Here
Violence, exclusion, and harassment aren’t just obstacles—they are strategies of control. From the parliament floor to the comment section, every effort to silence women is about more than discomfort. It’s about power.
But every protest, every woman who speaks out, every ally who intervenes—these are cracks in the system. They are reminders that public life does not belong to the few. It belongs to all of us.
And women are taking it back—on the streets, on screens, in legislatures, and in the cultural imagination.
In the final part of this series, we turn to the role of the United States—how internal regression on gender rights has sent global shockwaves, and how U.S. leadership (or lack thereof) continues to shape the fight for gender justice far beyond its borders.
Day 5 – When America Falls Behind, the World Pays Attention: U.S. Policy and Global Impact
The United States has long positioned itself as a global leader on human rights. For decades, American policymakers, philanthropists, and activists shaped global norms on women’s rights—championing reproductive health, gender equity, and legal protections through foreign aid, diplomacy, and international development.
From the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action to U.S.-funded reproductive health programs around the world, the U.S. projected itself as a defender of gender justice on the global stage. Its influence was far-reaching—not only because of its economic power, but because of its symbolic position as a constitutional democracy.
But today, the U.S. is also one of the most visible examples of democratic backsliding when it comes to gender equality. The reversal of abortion rights, the rise of anti-feminist and pro-male extremist movements, and the growing attacks on gender-affirming care, comprehensive sex education, and diversity initiatives have deeply undermined America’s credibility—and emboldened anti-gender forces worldwide.
The world is watching. And the consequences are far-reaching.
⚖️ From Roe to Regression: The Fall of Federal Abortion Rights
In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson overturned Roe v. Wade, ending nearly 50 years of federal protection for abortion rights. The fallout was immediate:
The decision sent shockwaves globally. The United Nations called it a “huge blow to women’s human rights.” WHO officials and global health experts warned it would lead to rising maternal mortality, unsafe procedures, and increased health inequities.
Internationally, the U.S. became one of only four countries in the past 20 years to restrict abortion laws—alongside Poland, El Salvador, and Nicaragua. This placed the U.S. out of step with global trends, which overwhelmingly favor expanded reproductive rights.
More than just a domestic policy shift, Dobbs emboldened anti-abortion and anti-gender movements around the world. Lawmakers in countries such as Hungary, Brazil, and Uganda have invoked U.S. rhetoric to justify their own restrictions, citing the fall of Roe as proof that “Western democracies” are rethinking gender equality.
The symbolic damage was immense. For many global activists, the U.S. went from being a key ally to a cautionary tale—proof that gender rights can be undone, even in long-standing democracies.
🩸 Criminalizing Survival: When Law Punishes, Not Protects
The erosion of rights in the United States goes far beyond reproductive care. In many cases, the legal system not only fails to protect women—it actively punishes them for trying to survive.
Thousands of women—disproportionately Black, Brown, and Indigenous—are incarcerated for actions rooted in self-defense, survival, or coercion. These women are not anomalies; they are a reflection of how gender, race, and poverty intersect in systems of punishment.
This punitive response is especially harsh for women who are poor, LGBTQ+, disabled, or undocumented. They are less likely to be believed, more likely to be arrested, and often lack access to competent legal defense.
The contradiction is stark: the same systems that claim to protect women from violence are the ones that surveil, blame, and incarcerate them. In effect, survival becomes a crime, and legal “protections” are revealed to be conditional—extended only to those deemed sympathetic or respectable.
Until self-defense is treated as a right for all—not just for white, middle-class victims—and until legal systems center the lived realities of survivors, the promise of justice will remain out of reach for many.
🌍 The Global Gag Rule: When U.S. Policy Crosses Borders
The reach of U.S. gender policy doesn’t stop at its borders. Through its global aid programs, the U.S. exerts massive influence on health care systems around the world—especially in the Global South. And one of the most harmful examples of that influence is the Global Gag Rule.
Also known as the Mexico City Policy, the Global Gag Rule prohibits foreign NGOs that receive U.S. funding from providing, referring, or even discussing abortion services—even with their own, non-U.S. funds. It has been repeatedly reinstated by Republican administrations and revoked by Democratic ones, creating cycles of chaos and instability in global health networks.
Reinstating or expanding the Global Gag Rule remains a top priority for far-right U.S. lawmakers, who see it as a way to impose domestic culture wars onto global health policy. Its effects are not just bureaucratic—they are fatal.
The Global Gag Rule illustrates how U.S. domestic politics can destabilize entire health ecosystems abroad, silencing providers, endangering lives, and undermining decades of progress in sexual and reproductive health. It turns U.S. foreign aid into a weapon—punishing the world’s most vulnerable to score points at home.
🤝 The Anti-Gender Alliance: How the U.S. Fuels Global Backlash
While the United States once helped shape the international consensus around gender equality, it has increasingly become both a battleground and a broker in the rise of a global anti-gender movement.
At international forums—including the United Nations, the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), and the World Health Assembly—U.S. delegations under conservative administrations have aligned with authoritarian and theocratic states to weaken or remove references to:
In recent years, U.S. diplomats have stood alongside governments like Russia, Saudi Arabia, Hungary, Egypt, and Brazil to challenge or obstruct progressive language in global agreements. These alliances are not accidental—they are part of a strategic transnational network that sees feminism, queer rights, and bodily autonomy as existential threats to the social order.
This movement—often referred to as the “anti-gender” alliance—brings together a diverse mix of actors:
Together, they promote what they call a defense of “the natural family,” “traditional values,” and “parental rights.” But the real goal is to roll back human rights gains, dismantle sexual and reproductive health systems, and reassert patriarchal control over family, sexuality, and identity.
U.S. influence in this movement is not peripheral—it’s central. American organizations provide funding, legal frameworks, and political cover for anti-gender initiatives worldwide. They train local leaders, draft legislative templates, and use international platforms to normalize gender backlash as a legitimate political stance.
The result is a rising tide of coordinated policy reversals, cultural censorship, and legal discrimination—from anti-trans legislation in the U.S. to abortion bans in Eastern Europe to attacks on gender education in Africa and Latin America.
What was once fringe rhetoric is now mainstream governance. And the U.S., long a promoter of human rights, now finds itself enabling the erosion of the very norms it helped build.
This is not just a culture war. It is a global strategy—one that must be named, understood, and resisted.
📲 Cultural Export: The U.S. Role in Spreading Online Misogyny
As much as the United States influences formal global policy, it also plays a powerful role in shaping the informal cultural terrain—especially online. The global rise in anti-feminist, pro-male radicalization is being powered not only by local actors, but by content created, monetized, and amplified on U.S.-based platforms.
The lack of digital regulation in the U.S. plays a major role. American tech companies are not held accountable for the spread of hate and disinformation in the same way they might be in Europe or other jurisdictions. As a result, misogyny has become an American export—spread not through official diplomacy, but through algorithms and ad revenue.
This influence is especially dangerous for young people. Teen boys across the world are being radicalized by U.S.-based content creators who frame feminism as a conspiracy, equity as emasculation, and women’s rights as a threat to male survival. This pipeline of digital hate normalizes gender-based violence, silences women, and fuels authoritarian politics worldwide.
In short, what happens on U.S. platforms doesn’t stay in the U.S. It shapes the global conversation about gender—and it’s increasingly turning that conversation toward hate.
🌎 Mixed Signals: A Divided Nation Sends Conflicting Messages
While federal protections for reproductive and gender rights have eroded in recent years, the United States is not a monolith. Beneath the surface of national regression, many U.S. states are advancing bold protections and policies.
This internal divide sends conflicting messages to the world:
For global allies, these contradictions complicate advocacy and diplomacy. For anti-gender movements, they provide rhetorical cover: “Even the U.S. is moving backwards.”
The reality is that the United States is both a site of backlash and a site of resistance. And the outcome of that internal battle will have ripple effects far beyond its borders.
🔁 The World Reacts: Resistance and Recommitment
The global response to U.S. regression on gender rights has been swift and forceful. For many, the fall of Roe v. Wade was not just a national crisis—it was a wake-up call. In the face of backlash, movements around the world have chosen not retreat, but recommitment.
• France became the first country to vote to enshrine the right to abortion in its constitution, sending a powerful signal that reproductive freedom is not negotiable.
• In Mexico, the Supreme Court decriminalized abortion nationwide in 2023, building on state-level victories and feminist mobilization.
• Across Latin America, the Green Wave continues to grow—drawing energy from both local struggles and global outrage over U.S. rollbacks.
The U.S. has become a cautionary tale: a reminder that rights not protected by law can be erased by politics. But that caution is also galvanizing action—from feminist diplomacy at the U.N. to grassroots organizing on every continent.
🧭 Where We Go from Here: A Global Mandate
The United States matters. Not because it is a perfect model—but because of its outsized influence on global funding, diplomacy, technology, and culture.
When the U.S. backslides, anti-gender forces around the world take note. They celebrate. They copy. They escalate. But when U.S. civil society fights back—when voters protect rights at the ballot box, when communities fund care networks, when survivors demand justice—it also inspires movements across the globe.
This moment demands more than alarm. It calls for bold, coordinated action:
We are not powerless. We are not alone. But we must act like the future of women’s rights—here and everywhere—depends on it.
Because it does.
🧾 Conclusion – The Fight for Women’s Rights Is Global, Fragile, and Far From Over
🌍 Final Reflections: The Stakes of 2025
The global state of women’s rights in 2025 is a story of both progress and peril. For every milestone—more girls in school, more women in politics, more access to reproductive care—there’s a reminder that no right is permanent.
From Afghanistan’s forced erasure of women from public life, to the U.S. rollback of abortion rights, to the digital rise of misogynist radicalization, we are seeing clear signs of regression—not just in policies, but in power, safety, and autonomy.
What this report makes clear is that gender equality isn’t just about laws or representation. It’s about:
The pushback against women’s rights is real. It is coordinated. And it is political.
But so is the response.
From Iranian girls burning hijabs, to Latin American feminists rewriting abortion law, to Black women organizing for birth justice in the U.S.—resistance is alive and rising.
To move forward, we must treat gender equality not as a side issue, but as a barometer of democracy, peace, and prosperity. When women lose rights, it signals broader authoritarian decline. But when women gain power, we all rise.
This is not a passing moment. It is the defining fight of a generation.
And it belongs to all of us.
📲 Social Media Posts (1 per Day)
Day 1 – Legal Backsliding
📢 Post Title: Women’s Rights Are Being Rolled Back—Globally.
🔹 Hook: Think this is just about the U.S.? Think again.
💡 What’s happening:
These aren’t isolated cases—they’re part of a global rise in far-right, anti-gender movements.
✅ What to know:
🗣️ CTA:
Drop a 🧨 if you’ve seen women’s rights under attack in your own country.
📲 Read Day 1 of our global series: [link]
Day 2 – Reproductive Autonomy
📢 Post Title: 218 Million Women Want Birth Control—And Can’t Get It.
🔹 Hook: Abortion bans aren’t the only threat.
💡 What’s happening:
✅ What to do:
🗣️ CTA:
Tag a friend who needs to see this.
🧵 Read Day 2 of our global series: [link]
Day 3 – Economic Inequality & Labor Exploitation
📢 Post Title: Women Do the Work. The World Looks Away.
🔹 Hook: What do a nanny in Saudi Arabia and a farmworker in California have in common?
💡 What’s happening:
✅ What to know:
🗣️ CTA:
Share this if you believe care work is real work.
📲 Read Day 3 of our global series: [link]
Day 4 – Violence & Political Exclusion
📢 Post Title: 1 in 3 Women Experience Violence. Many Are in Power When It Happens.
🔹 Hook: Being in government doesn’t make women safe—it makes them targets.
💡 What’s happening:
✅ What to do:
🗣️ CTA:
Comment 💪 if you’re done with silence.
📲 Read Day 4 of our global series: [link]
Day 5 – U.S. Influence & Global Impact
📢 Post Title: The U.S. Isn’t Just Regressing. It’s Exporting It.
🔹 Hook: When Roe fell, the world noticed. So did the far right.
💡 What’s happening:
✅ What to know:
🗣️ CTA:
Tag someone who needs to know what’s really going on.
📲 Read the final day of our global series: [link]
Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.
This is not the way.
Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (
CtrlP
) instead.