Together we call on the European Union to adopt a forward-thinking and truly inclusive approach to gender-based violence - that leaves no one behind and strives to achieve real change in the lives of all people, without discrimination. To meaningfully address gender-based violence in the European Union, we must promote inclusion, safety, protection, well-being and effective remedies for those most at risk. In the lead up to International Women’s Day, 8 March, and the expected publication of a draft EU law to address violence against women and domestic violence, the under-signed organisations have adopted this manifesto for a truly inclusive EU law and policy. We welcome the leadership of the European Commission in taking action, and the engagement of the European Parliament, and urge everyone who will be involved in this effort to take an inclusive and intersectional feminist approach. All civil society organisations and Members of European Parliament are invited to join us – sign up to the manifesto here.

Over the last years, the EU has been facing many challenges in the realization of its core values: the rule of law, democracy, human rights, equality, gender equality and women’s rights. The upcoming years are an opportunity for the EU to reflect on the direction it wants to take, the values it should stand for, and what more it can do to uphold and defend them. The EU should strive towards a world where everyone can enjoy the same rights, and lead free and safe private and family lives, free from sexism, coercion, and violence. In this crossroads moment, the Council of the EU Presidency Trio – France, Czech Republic and Sweden – has a critical role to play to uphold EU values. We call on this Trio to adopt a feminist approach and show stronger leadership to further advance gender equality and women’s rights, including sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), in the EU and beyond.  More on our recommendations for the Trio in the factsheet below, available in English and French.

26 January 2022 – One year after the ruling of Poland’s discredited Constitutional Tribunal banning access to abortion in almost all circumstances took effect, its devastating impact on the lives of women and all those in need of abortion care continues. The ruling has increased the extreme barriers women seeking access to abortion face and has had tragic consequences for many of them and their families. Since the ruling took effect on 27 January 2021, more than 1000 women have turned to the European Court of Human Rights in an effort to vindicate their rights, challenging Poland’s highly restrictive abortion law and seeking justice. These groundbreaking cases mark the first direct challenges to be filed before the European Court against Poland’s abortion law and the 2020 Constitutional Tribunal ruling. The applicants claim that the Polish abortion law causes them grave harm and violates their rights to privacy and freedom from torture and other ill-treatment. The Court is expected to begin ruling on some of these cases: K.B. v. Poland and 3 other applications; K.C. v. Poland and 3 other applications; and A.L.- B. v. Poland and 3 other applications. Nine leading international human rights organizations have filed third-party interventions to the European Court of Human Rights in these cases, including Amnesty International, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN), Women Enabled International, Women’s Link Worldwide, and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT). The interventions provide evidence and analysis drawing on international human rights law, comparative European law and guidelines from the World Health Organization. They outline the profound implications that highly restrictive abortion laws have on the lives and health of women and girls of reproductive age.  

In its latest politically motivated ruling, Poland's Constitutional Tribunal last week ruled that the Polish Constitution was not subject to EU law. This is only the most recent in a series of developments that trample on the rule of law and human rights in Poland, rubber stamped by a tribunal riddled with ruling Law and Justice (PiS)-party supporters. Hundreds of thousands of people are taking to the streets in Poland to protest against this. Authorities have responded with detentions and physical violence reminiscent of their response to the pro-abortion protests in October 2020. Nine people have been detained thus far, including an LGBTIQ activist, and authorities have taken down the names of 71 people who were protesting. Far-right groups have again organised counter-actions impeding peaceful protesters, with little reaction from police forces. The Polish government has long been in dispute with the EU, repeatedly refusing to implement rulings of the EU's Court of Justice, including one to withdraw the PiS-dominated judicial Disciplinary Chamber, which threatens and intimidates Polish judges, undermining their independence. The government has also forced out of office its Ombudsman who acted as a watchdog for human rights. And it is now working to withdraw from an internationally recognised convention protecting women from violence. The crippling of the rule of law is having real-life consequences for Polish citizens, and women human rights defenders (WHRDs) are the biggest casualties. The 22 October 2020 Constitutional Tribunal decision to impose a near-total ban on abortion was a massive attack on women's sexual and reproductive rights. The result is agonising for women and their families. Some are forced to continue pregnancies against their will, including in cases of fatal or severe foetal impairment. Others have no choice but to travel abroad to seek care, if they have the financial means to do so, or to seek unsafe abortions. The ban needlessly increased the suffering of women and sparked massive protests throughout the country. And a year after these protests, WHRDs face many threats and attacks both from the state and non-state groups. The abortion ban has helped create a climate that is more permissive of attacks on women's rights. The authorities have repeatedly used excessive force and physical violence against protesters, who have been targeted by police officers. WHRDs are facing criminal charges from politically appointed prosecutors, while charges against police and far-right groups who perpetrated violence against them are being dropped. WHRDs' lives continue to be threatened by extremists.   Emotional burnout Many have been on the receiving end of rape and death threats and bomb scares over their activism. Their financial livelihoods have been affected, with some women losing their jobs or being publicly ostracised for their participation in protests. Many are on the brink of mental and emotional burnout. This is the heavy price that Polish women are paying for trying to stand up for the rule of law and civic freedoms in the face of the government's onslaught. Marta Lempart, co-founder of the Polish Women's Strike (Strajk Kobiet) recently told the European Parliament about the consequences of ongoing activism: "This is hard ... We lose our jobs, our families suffer, we are being detained, we are being beaten up, we are tear gassed, we put our bodies on the line, we put our lives on the line", she said. "The Polish state treats us as enemies ... We are freedom fighters," Lempart said. Lempart is facing close to 80 criminal charges for her own role in the protests. The charges against her are undoubtedly an attempt to silence and intimidate her and other WHRDs. Lempart has not been able to return to her home because she "fears being killed". Nadia, a 21-year old WHRD, also received death and rape threats. "Every time I check my email and see another threat, I become more and more frightened and overwhelmed," the activist said. The authorities are not offering the women any protection from violence. The degradation of the rule of law in Poland only makes such attacks more likely, and makes it less likely that perpetrators will be held to account. Despite these life-altering circumstances, WHRDs are demonstrating that the fight is far from over. WHRDs from the Polish Women's Strike have been collecting signatures throughout this month for a bill that would reverse the abortion ban. A total of 100,000 citizen signatures need to be collected for the new bill to be introduced to the assembly for debate.    Increase EU support Polish WHRDs are looking to the EU to stand up for their rights, but the most recent Constitutional Tribunal ruling once again demonstrates the Polish government's complete disregard for EU rules and values. The government continues to ask for huge amounts of aid from the EU's Covid Recovery Fund even as it is, in effect, trying to unilaterally renegotiate the terms of its membership, and undermining the independent judicial oversight that safeguards against corruption. But many Polish citizens are saying enough is enough. Just as they massively protested against the abortion ban, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets all over Poland last weekend to protest against a 'legal Polexit'. The EU must stand with Polish citizens in this fight. Polish WHRDs and citizens need more than statements from EU leaders: they need protection, resources, continuous pressure, and urgent action. While the rule of law remains under attack, the EU must not back down. It must continue to withhold the recovery funding and must immediately impose conditions on other EU money going to Poland. These funds should bypass the government and be redirected to Polish groups who respect and uphold EU values. This means the EU must urgently increase its financial support for civil society and WHRDs on the ground. Their survival is key to the survival of the rule of law in Poland, and to any hopes the EU has of making its values count for something.   By: Camille Butin is an advocacy advisor at the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network Network. Aarti Narsee is a researcher at CIVICUS Monitor. Originally published in the EU Observer.

Women’s rights defenders in Poland have faced violence from law enforcement and far-right groups, as well as smear campaigns in state-controlled media and excessive criminal charges. This harassment has been orchestrated and encouraged by the government. This is Iwona's story. For Iwona, the last six months have been the toughest of her life – emotionally, physically and financially. Iwona has been actively involved in the Women’s Strike movement – the biggest women and social justice movement revolt since the 80s – in a small town with 60,279 inhabitants – ever since Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal, dominated by right-wing judges and backed by Julia Przyłębska who presides over the illegitimate Constitutional Tribunal, banned abortion on the grounds of foetal abnormality on 22 October 2020. Since then, the teacher turned activist has organised six “Walk for Freedom and Women’s Rights” protests in her home city. The first of these was held on Sunday 25 October amassing around two thousand people. Three days later, after President Kaczynski's famous "address", where he urged Neo Nazis to defend the churches from “Bad feminist abortion b**ches from hell”, about 5,000 people came to "walk" with the activist, holding a banner: "Forgive the obstruction, Tczew has a government to overthrow".   Someone Had To Light The First Match As the headmistress of a non-public school, she was previously only known within the teaching community. Iwona had yet to catch on to the growing feminist movement in Poland kickstarted by the first All-Poland Women’s Strike (Ogólnopolski Strajk Kobiet, OSK) in 2016 against proposed legislation to tighten abortion laws. However, two years later she was protesting to defend courts free from political influence, the rights of teachers, and the rights of LGBTQI+ people. She travelled to Poland’s Tri-City area for Manifa, an annual demonstration organized around International Women’s Day on March 8 and across Poland for Gay Pride marches. There have never been such large-scale demonstrations in Tczew before, especially anti-government ones. Iwona admits that she herself was surprised by the turnout and the response to the slogan: “I took part in the protests anonymously, without party symbols. First in a rainbow mask, then one bearing a lightning bolt. I didn’t want to appear party-affiliated. The demands were more important than the emblems. My data was later leaked by a Tczew paper, the local propaganda mouthpiece of the PiS (Law and Justice) Party.” Tczew has a population of around 53,000. During one of the protests Iwona “brought” almost 10% of the community onto the streets, much to the annoyance of a prominent and unscrupulous Member of Parliament (MP) from PiS, who is also a dangerous Catholic fundamentalist, chauvinist and homophobe. The activist and her entire family were immediately affected by the street actions.   PiS Won’t Forgive And Forget Soon after the first protests, Iwona’s husband lost his job at a state-owned company. “His qualifications relate to big industry, which at the moment either has ties to the authorities or belongs to the authorities,” says Iwona. In response, on 15 November, over 300 people took to the streets of Tczew in solidarity. Although encouraging, it did little to change the situation. He became one of the “unemployables”. In turn, a government-run campaign was unleashed against her and continues. Disciplinary proceedings against her by the Board of Education are underway. In November, she was officially charged with incitement to animal abuse. An absurd move, which was orchestrated by the same fundamentalist PiS MP,  Kazimierz Smolinski. Over several months, the teacher has been summoned to successive “hearings” at the Department of Education. She is now at risk of losing her teaching licence. This is a textbook example of the regime’s repression of rebellious citizens.

It is said that no one is irreplaceable. If this is true, Marta Lempart is the exception that proves the rule. For most female activists who have been in the Women’s Strike since the beginning, this is obvious. Although she herself usually says otherwise: “I am not indispensable”. But she is. Without her, this speeding train would not go on. Yes, a whole group of people contribute to the success of the Strike’s work, but Marta is the engine. She is the one who sets the tone and gives a ‘face’ to the social movement. It is thanks to her instinct and strategic sense that this crazy train has not yet derailed and landed in a ditch somewhere. Those who work most closely with her on a daily basis look after her health and well-being, because they know that the movement leader’s charisma drives activists across the country. This locomotive has to deliver, it has to keep giving. And yet it is pulling more and more carriages behind it. Because the Strike is growing, spreading endlessly to new places. There are more and more duties, tasks to be fulfilled, new challenges that appear, problems to be solved. Marta is crucial to the Strike because for a long time she carried it almost on her own shoulders. “There were times when we were carrying out these daily duties and running the [Polish Women’s Strike] Foundation practically alone with my partner and co-founder.” She has the contacts, the Strike’s history and the narrative at her fingertips. And she has kind of gotten people used to the idea that she takes care of everything herself. She has a tendency to take on too much, but she is working on this, learning to delegate tasks, to involve other people in her work and to distribute responsibilities. She knows she has to, because this social movement is expanding and developing at great pace and needs more and more people to support it. The central helpdesk team needs to grow with it.   An Influential Woman Of The Year Marta was awarded this title by Forbes Magazine in 2020. She was also voted Superheroine of 2020 by High Heels, a weekly magazine connected with Gazeta Wyborcza. When she’s on top form, Marta is fearless, relentless, focused, deadly logical and unflappable. She writes brilliantly and performs even better live. She gets to the point, speaks simply, clearly and lucidly, and knows how to reach out to anyone. At the same time, she is able to appeal to people’s emotions and get the crowd behind her. She is known for not throwing words to the wind and for being able to condense the message into a single word, as with the famous “F*©µ off!” She describes herself as “selectively high functioning”. She gives her best when she needs to give her best. She rises to the occasion. But after she gets to the peak of what she can do, a dip in form and a slump inevitably follow. Or, as in the last few months, a real crisis and depression.

High on the list of things that Viktor Orban doesn’t want you to know: homosexuality is a Hungarian invention. Before human rights campaigner Karl-Maria Kertbeny sat down to write a quiet letter to a leading German activist in 1868, the word homosexual did not exist. Neither did heterosexual. When he invented these terms, Kertbeny became the first European thinker to give queer people a neutral label for their experience, and to say it was equal to straightness. Many people continue to lay flowers at his grave in Budapest in recognition of this important Hungarian contribution to the history of LGBQ* dignity. Until recently, Hungarian society has continued in this vein, not always a pioneer but frequently showing its neighbours an example of steady advancement in the field of human rights. Homosexual sex was decriminalized there in 1961, relatively early compared to other contemporary socialist states in Europe – East Germans and Bulgarians, for example, had to wait until 1968. In the EU era, Hungary’s parliament adopted the bill to approve civil partnerships in 2007, making them accessible to their citizens substantially faster than in Croatia (2014), Greece (2015) or Italy (2016). And earlier this year, an independent poll demonstrated that the Hungarian people are still carrying on this tradition of reaching gradually for social progress: 59% of Hungarians believe that gay couples should have equal rights to adopt a child, an increase from the 42% who felt the same way in 2013. This historical trajectory is rather inconvenient to Mr Orban. He would like Hungarians to believe the European value of LGBTQI* freedom is a Western import, a foreign ‘ideology’, rather than something their country did much to realize long before the inception of the European Union. Fidesz, his ruling right-wing party, has a particular passion for victimizing LGBTQI* people, parcelling up actions that trample on trans and queer people’s human rights with measures designed to shut down intellectual life and access to education. Academic gender studies have been banned in Hungarian universities since 2018. In 2020, transgender and intersex people were robbed of their access to legal gender recognition. Summer 2021 saw the regime manoeuvring its wide-ranging package of amendments to “Child Protection” and “Family Protection” laws into place: as of July, it is illegal to share information about LGBTQI* lives with young people under the age of 18. Sexuality education that tells the truth about the range of human sexuality and gender has been banned in schools; no content relating to queer or trans people can be shown on television if a child might see it; booksellers within two hundred metres of a school or a church face prosecution for stocking literature featuring queer or trans characters. Political homophobia spreads    Hungary is of course not alone in falling victim to such deterioration. These measures are fed by, and feed into, a wave of human rights rollbacks threatening millions of Europeans. Hate against LGBTQI* people is increasingly legitimized through measures that forbid any public mention of their existence, on the pretext of shielding children from supposedly harmful knowledge. In Romania this summer, far-right party AUR felt emboldened enough by Hungary’s latest move to announce its own proposed law to “limit the representation or promotion of homosexuality and gender reassignment among minors”. While the party are not currently in government, and were likely angling for attention during a quiet period, this threat comes hot on the heels of several years of attempts to give parents the right to control what information about gender and sexuality their children receive in school, and to enshrine homophobia in the country’s constitution with a proposed amendment regarding marriage rights. Just as in Hungary, a homophobic, transphobic and anti-education bill that was presented in Poland’s parliament in 2019 was dressed up as a protection against paedophilia. It would make anyone providing comprehensive sexuality education to young people in schools a criminal. That bill is currently frozen in legislative process, neither adopted nor rejected. Recent announcements suggest that it will soon reappear in the form of a much broader, more dangerous anti-LGBTQ* law, more similar to Hungary’s, that will apply to many other settings beside schools. Since then, there has been a continuous escalation in brutal state violence committed against those protesting Poland’s shutdown of reproductive healthcare – their shocking testimonies must be read to be believed. Anyone following the situation can see how a law preventing street demonstrators even mentioning LGBTQI* rights – in case a child reads a placard - will be hugely destructive for any and all people taking a stand on these connected struggles. The paradox of conservative censorship   Thinking about public expression is key to understanding what exactly is going on here. It is, after all, categorically strange for right-wing parties to be so enthusiastic about state intervention in private life, and so violently opposed to the protection of that profoundly libertarian value: the right to say what you like. This is not a phenomenon unique to central Europe, but a trend across the continent – consider the appetite for sexuality-related censorship of far-right groups Fratelli d'Italia, VOX in Spain, and Portugal’s Chega. Certainly for those hardline conservatives who are in power, one goal is to misdirect public attention from their mishandling of economic, and latterly pandemic, issues. Framing LGBTQI* citizens as the current major threat to national stability is a smoke-and-mirrors diversion tactic, designed to disguise holes in a manifesto or deflect state accountability for preventable deaths, rocketing unemployment, and spiralling hopelessness. These leaders are exploiting multiple issues that trigger primal fears (“other” groups threatening social order, harm coming to one’s children and so on), in order to make loss of freedoms seem more palatable and therefore get away with shutting down dissent. A clear message from European leaders   The fight to win back decades of gains in human rights, sexual autonomy and self-determination depends on affected citizens participating fully and freely in national and international exchange. This is what IPPF EN seeks to facilitate. We bring together activists operating on different progressive causes in challenging European contexts to share knowledge, increase their sense of community, and help them develop their tactics. The strong stances we saw from European leaders expressed in June’s letter from the EU Council have been an encouraging sign of international solidarity, as have the Commission’s infringement procedures launched against Poland and Hungary in July, and the tabling of a wider parliamentary resolution on protecting LGBTQI* rights across Europe in the September 13th plenary. As these darkly conservative narratives play out to the same rhythm, again and again, it’s clear that such messages from European leaders must be backed up with financial support for activists if we want to combat an increasingly organized international threat. It might seem counterintuitive, but the upcoming referendum that Orban has scheduled on his offensive law should offer a glimmer of hope. The referendum questions are patently biased, written to confuse and manipulate, leaving people no way to express disagreement with the law and therefore no choice but to boycott it if they don’t support hate. We should see this as an admission of weakness. Orban fears he cannot count on a free vote to deliver a result against human rights, and so has engineered a rigged one. He knows there are plenty of people left who will resist him if they feel it is possible. It is down to the rest of us to ensure that it is. *Note: when we write LGBTQI*, we are referring to everybody who isn't straight and cis Main photo by Mercedes Mehling on Unsplash

As December started, many of us in Europe were probably looking forward to celebrating Christmas with our loved ones, hoping this year would allow COVID-free celebrations, hugs and many people around the table. However, the arrival of the Omicron variant has us rethinking our plans. It must be clear in our heads, and those of our leaders, that we are in this together. No matter our differences, most of us want pretty similar things – to go through our lives in good health and to get quick, good, compassionate care if we are ever ill or injured; to see our families and friends and be able to hug our loved ones. The way new variants have circulated around the globe shows us one thing: no one will be safe, until everyone is safe. It shows that the solution lies in solidarity and not in closing borders. It shows that the solution lies in everyone having access to basic health services, including sexual and reproductive health services, and to vaccination. It simply shows that at least part of the solution lies in achieving a universal health coverage for all. Universal Health Coverage (UHC) means that all people can access the care they need without fearing they will go bankrupt when they do. And at the core of basic health services lay sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). SRHR are an integral part of the right to the highest attainable standard of health, to gender equality and to health equity. If SRHR services, information and education are not integrated as key components of UHC, there will be no achievement of UHC nor the fulfilment of the right to health. Ahead of UHC day, we want to look forward to a healthy future. And in this context, an important opportunity must be seized in 2022: the Summit between the African Union (AU) and the European Union (EU), organised tentatively in February 2022 in Brussels. The two Unions have been discussing a renewed partnership for some time, but have so far missed the opportunity to truly focus on sustainable development. They, and their Member States, have a responsibility towards their people to ensure that no one is left behind and that gender equality and human development are at the core of the partnership between the two continents. And to do so, part of the response lies with moving towards universal health coverage. This is why, ahead of UHC day, civil society calls on the AU and the EU take the opportunity of the joint summit to: Develop jointly pathways to achieving universal health coverage, based on the principles of non-discrimination, informed choice, transparency and accountability. Health systems and services should be available, accessible, acceptable and of good quality. They should be gender-transformative and address gender-related barriers to health for all; Recognise SRHR as an indispensable and integral component of UHC, critical to the realisation of the right to health, sustainable development and a necessary precondition for gender equality and non-discrimination and ending poverty; Actively engage communities in achieving universal health coverage, as their participation is key to building health services that are responsive to the local needs of communities. In the framework of the summit, engage civil society organisations and communities and include their recommendations and demands in the outcomes of the summit; Allocate adequate funding for universal access to health services, including SRHR, that are equitable, accessible, affordable and needs-based, including in conflict and humanitarian settings, as well as for communities living in remote or rural areas. This should include funding for grassroot CSOs delivering SRHR services, as they are key actors to reach out to the most vulnerable and underserved communities, in all areas and contexts. Let’s not waste the opportunity ahead. We need solidarity and access for all to health services if we are to achieve sustainable development and gender equality, and to respond to the critical challenges we are facing, such as global pandemics or the climate crisis. All people, regardless of where we live or of how much money we have in our wallet, deserve to be able to make the best healthcare choices for ourselves and our families. UHC will enable us to do so.

“Sex without consent is rape”. This statement sounds self-evident. And yet our laws and our lived experiences show that it is still far from being universally recognized and understood. On two recent occasions, watching fiction with friends - Game of Thrones and Basic Instinct - where scenes of rape were depicted, we found ourselves debating whether these were in fact rapes. To me, it was very clear that the female characters on screen did not consent to sex. But since in both scenes, they knew the men, and had previous relationships with them, others felt that this was somehow enough to downplay these situations and question whether they did constitute rape. This brought home for me, once again, how far we still have to go. If my friends, who are pretty committed to gender equality, cannot identify rape in fiction, then what about broader society, and most importantly what about real life? A societal problem   Polls reflect this alarming reality. More than a quarter of Europeans believe that sexual violence can be excused: 27% said that "sexual intercourse without consent can be justifiable" in certain situations, most such circumstances having to do with the behaviour of the victim. When surveys don’t use the word “rape” but factually describe situations that constitute rape, they expose how pervasive it is: a poll in France revealed that out of almost 100 000 female respondents, more than half (53.2%) reported having experienced non-consensual penetrative sex with one or more partners. On the other side of the same coin, recently 63 male students out of 554 surveyed in the UK admitted to having committed 251 sexual assaults, rapes, and other coercive and unwanted incidents. The study also showed that these perpetrators were significantly more likely to believe that women are to blame for being assaulted, and to hold hostile views about women. We are still collectively terrible at identifying, and condemning, sexual violence. It’s not a mystery why. We live in a society which blames victims/survivors, in order to let violent men off the hook: that is the primary function of rape culture. Laws are the result of the patriarchal culture we live in and reflect this toxic mindset. We need urgent and concrete actions to address sexual violence on both fronts: to change legislation, and to change mentalities. Reflected in legislation   In Europe, shockingly, most countries do not criminalise sex without consent. Their laws usually require the use of force or coercion as an additional factor in order for a non-consensual act to be considered as sexual violence. According to a review of the legislation of European countries done by Amnesty International in 2020, only 12 European countries out of 31 analysed had laws that define rape as sex without consent. This is despite the fact that most countries have ratified the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention, the first legally binding comprehensive instrument to prevent and combat violence against women and domestic violence. The Convention clearly states that engaging in non-consensual sexual activity constitutes sexual violence. It further says that “consent must be given voluntarily as the result of the person’s free will assessed in the context of the surrounding circumstances”. How is it possible that so many countries ratified this landmark treaty, yet have not changed their legislation to bring it in line with its binding requirements? Inadequate laws on sexual violence have a devastating impact on victims/survivors. They encourage victim blaming, excuse violence, and fail to prosecute rapists. Instead of looking for proof that the perpetrator used enough force or assessing whether the victim/survivor put up enough resistance, the legal system should focus on whether the victim/survivor explicitly consented to sex. And if not, that should be enough to constitute sexual violence. “Yes means Yes” laws represent a necessary change of paradigm to protect victims/survivors more effectively. The road ahead   In June 2021, in a most welcome development only made possible by intense mobilization by women’s rights NGOs, Slovenia changed its law on sexual violence to adopt a consent-based legislative proposal. Spain is also currently reviewing its legislation on sexual violence, to adopt a consent-based model. The “Only Yes Means Yes” bill follows the shocking ‘La Manada’ case, where a group of men were initially found guilty of the lesser offence of sexual abuse instead of rape, because the prosecution could not prove that they used force against the victim/survivor. Other countries must follow suit, urgently. All European countries must ratify and implement the Istanbul Convention, including by changing their legislation to comply with its legal definition of sexual violence. Changing laws and mentalities goes hand in hand: putting an end to rape culture will require not just a change of legislation, but profound societal transformation too. Education is key in that regard. Relationship sexuality education, which teaches children and young people about consent in intimate relationships, is essential. The European Commission is now working on a new legislative proposal to prevent and combat violence against women. This Directive should tackle the issue of sexual violence, and unequivocally adopt the definition of the Istanbul Convention, namely that sex without consent is rape. The Directive should also include comprehensive relationship and sex education as a key prevention measure, to improve young people’s understanding of consent, enable them to identify sexual violence, discourage them from perpetrating it, and empower them to report it.

A society free from sexism and discrimination is only possible if we dismantle harmful gender norms and stereotypes. The idea that young men are often expected to suppress their emotions so that they can conform to damaging understandings of strength and masculinity is archaic. It leaves men ill-equipped to express or navigate through their emotions, which can later on cause issues for their mental health. Equally, young women are often expected to be polite and accommodating to others - even in situations where they are made to feel uncomfortable. Conforming to this expectation can make it more difficult for women to assert themselves and can lead to their enduring discrimination or abuse. By breaking down these archaic stereotypes, we can foster equality. In order to discuss these matters as well equal and empowering representation of girls and women on screen, we teamed up with Netflix within the European Week of Action for Girls and created a space for dialogue between policy makers and the young people looking to advocate for positive change. Our event brought together Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the European Commission, Busisiwe Ntintili, creator and showrunner of Netflix series JIVA! and Sunni Faba writer of How To Ruin Christmas: The Wedding and youth advocates Claudia (23) from Ghana as well as Maja (21) from Sweden. VP Jourová started by sharing about her past and being born in communist Czechoslovakia where she was told many times to “Speak only when they ask you to speak”.