Will Mexico’s First Presidenta Turn the Tide Against Gender Violence?

With Mexico's presidential election quickly approaching, commentary abounds about the possible implications of the next president being a woman. Claudia Sheinbaum, the former governor of Mexico City from 2018 to last year, is the designated candidate of the MORENA political party, or the National Regeneration Movement. Xóchitl Gálvez, the opposing candidate, a senator in Mexico, represents the conservative coalition of the PRI, the Institutional Revolutionary Party, and the PAN, the National Action Party.

What is certain is that there will be a female president and this could lead people to presume two things: having a woman president implies a huge advance for the feminist movement; and that greater actions will be taken to eradicate gender-based violence in the country. Unfortunately, the trajectory and structures that sustain their candidacies point to other goals.

“Are we going to have an agenda that will truly attack the structural causes of gender discrimination?”

One can’t deny the political, social, and even symbolic relevance that, for the first time, there is a real possibility of having a woman president. This is an achievement of the women’s struggle for the right to vote and be elected, not a concession of the State, much less of the political parties. The women’s movement has been long, embattled, and on many occasions deadly. In 2021, 21 female candidates running for public office were murdered. This year alone, at least four women have lost their lives in what appear to be political assassinations.

But to jump from that reality to the suggestion that these candidacies represent significant progress in prioritizing attention to the violence and discrimination that we women experience is a huge leap of faith. Rather, the juncture we are in forces us to ask: Are we going to have an agenda that will truly attack the structural causes of gender discrimination? It doesn't look like it.

Although each candidate has spoken out on the importance of eradicating violence against women, so far, the proposals put forward by their party platforms appear to be incongruent with that goal.

For example, the maximum-security prison that Gálvez proposes completely ignores the disproportionate impact that prisons have on women and glosses over the fact that since 2011, compared to men, they have been incarcerated at higher rates. And we cannot fail to mention, although contradictory and incongruous with her indigenous origin and self-ascription, Gálvez serves as the head of a coalition composed of the country’s two most repressive political parties against women and indigenous communities.

Sheinbaum supports the country’s continuing militarization, an arming up of the nation that has been marked by increasing attacks against women. More than 68,000 women suffered violence at the hands of the military in 2020 and in years prior, close to 41 percent of women arrested by them has been a victim of rape.

Furthermore, the presence and clear permanence of the patriarchal structures that have been supporting both candidates raise serious doubt about the possibility of either one rupturing these foundations and generating an agenda focused on the deep problems that we women experience in Mexico, particularly femicide.

So, beyond the conveniently feminist discourse of both candidates, focused mainly on obtaining the votes of a significant sector of the population, we return to the question: Does a woman president guarantee a political agenda focused on women? Apparently not.

Looking at the experience of other women who have held important positions of political power, along with the analysis of our current context, we can conclude that gender alone does not determine the potential to achieve the structural transformation we want. Rather, it rests on the need to uproot sexist, classist, and racist neoliberal policies.

And it is not that a higher bar is placed on the candidates because they are women, compared to the men who have held that office. It is precisely because of this historical opportunity that they have in front of them that the demand becomes more urgent, and that change is awaited – albeit naively – with greater enthusiasm.

Translated by Juana Ponce de León.