A year ago, groups dedicated to gender equality were bracing themselves for a second Trump term. Hardly anyone anticipated. The volume and speed of executive orders originating in the White House were interpreted as a premeditated approach to cause confusion and fear. To a large extent, it succeeded – there was disarray, outrage, and weariness as networks struggled to fill the gap left by a freeze on international development funds. But that was just the beginning.
The Trump administration has been the key driver, aided by vigorous campaigning by religious fundamentalist networks using the moment to strengthen global ties with ideological partners.
The anti-rights movement signifies a transnational grouping of political leaders, religious institutions, civil society groups as well as wealthy philanthropists and dynasties that work to dismantle gains in a variety of areas. Areas targeted involve access to termination, gay and trans protections, alternative households, and factual sexual instruction.
They accomplish their goals by lobbying governments, supporting court cases, discrediting international efforts to advance equality, spreading disinformation, and funding non-profit organisations.
We review five episodes that influenced the security, respect, and well-being of women and girls.
In early spring, a month and a half following a major US aid agency is suspended, causing widespread distress, a senior US official states that nearly all of the organization's initiatives will be axed. American foreign service officers, past leaders and relief and public health authorities decry the decision, predicting that fatalities will ensue. Activists say that the dismantling of this institution is greater than a budgetary issue, it is a brutal assault on fundamental freedoms and birth control and maternal healthcare. Many organisations say the impact on girls and women will be severe by waning support, especially in conflict areas. As the year ends, evidence indicates how a significant mortality toll has been exacted from sickness, hunger, poor pregnancy healthcare, and abuse targeting females, with a far greater catastrophe looming. Another pair of leading funders proceed with parallel slashes. A head of a worldwide campaign network says a choice to reduce international development funding is an attempt to placate a powerful partner.
In March, several faith-based advocacy networks meet in an high-end hotel in NYC for a strategic summit held alongside the UN's flagship gender equality meeting. It is an forum to discuss methods on how to oppose what they term a UN overreach. They are in high spirits as they celebrate new Washington directives on gender, diversity and abortion. Meanwhile, the UN secretary general opens the gender equality forum with a grave caution that “the venom of male dominance” is back, after a study indicates that groups opposing progressive rights are systematically eroding longstanding consensus on key women’s rights issues around the world.
Over the summer, a sequence of gatherings in Africa centered on the traditional family and national sovereignty triggers anxiety among rights advocates. In early May, a head of state and partner open a significant conference to combat what they label external influences undermining local norms. A shortly thereafter, another continental gathering on family values is held. Both events are attended by leading US and European anti-rights figures, including heads of influential networks. One speaker calls on African NGOs to resist “worldwide progressive social restructuring” of multilateral bodies. In June, a global faith group hosts a event focused on reinforcing families in an African nation, an event that reproductive rights advocates say has become a forum for opposing queer and trans rights. Campaigners note that the level of external participation has expanded considerably.
As clinics in sub-Saharan Africa report they are facing shortages of birth control, including post-rape care packages, the US announces in midsummer plans to dispose of a vast stockpile of birth control held in a European depot. A global sexual health network states that their destruction will deny countless females from contraceptive supplies, and lead to hundreds of thousands of unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions. The organization labels the plan an dogmatic choice “about exporting a regressive policy worldwide” and “a calculated move to control fertility”. A prominent medical humanitarian organization calls it “heartless and dangerous”. NGOs offer to buy the contraceptives so they can be distributed to those in need, but the US declines every proposal. The situation remains at a standstill as host nation officials will not allow the destruction of viable medicines.
Bringing back the anti-abortion funding ban, which halts US aid to groups that provide, advocate for or advise on abortion services overseas, is commonplace under certain US administrations. It came as no surprise when the ban was reimposed in the first month of the year. The administration also rejoined an international anti-abortion agreement. But in October, the US announces it intends to extend the restrictions to include national governments and international bodies in addition to NGOs, and to encompass equity and inclusion initiatives. Further specifics about the policy's widened application are expected in early 2026. A director of a major health partnership says broadening the policy will have “catastrophic impacts”. Advocates for bodily autonomy fear that upcoming Washington funding agreements being discussed with African nations will become dependent on agreeing to the new, wider policy.