Gender diversity at the international level: the inclusion of the LGBTI+ Agenda in MERCOSUR

Abstract

Currently, debates on gender diversity and LGBTI+ rights have become internationalized, both in a theoretical and political sense (Bosia et al., 2020; Rahman, 2020). By theoretical, we refer to the inclusion of gender-related issues in international relations through two questions or sentences introduced by the first feminist authors of the discipline: the first one is the question where are the women?; the second one refers to the moto personal in international. These contributions made it possible to show how gender and sexuality have specific dynamics in the international arena (Cardinale and Winer, 2022; Enloe, 2014; González and Perrotta, 2021; Manzano, 2015; Sylvester, 2015). By political, we refer to the decision of several international organizations and western states to include the rights of LGBTI+ people as a Human Rights issue in new institutional structures and in their foreign policy. However, the current internationalization of these issues must be understood historically (it occurs in current times and not necessarily before or after) and culturally (it is mainly a Western phenomenon) (Bosia et al., 2020; Rahman, 2020). These premises allow us to ask ourselves: how is this issue being addressed in Latin America? For doing so, the paper focuses on the incorporation and development of a specific Agenda for the LGBTI+ in South American countries within the framework of the most relevant regional integration process: the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR). Feminist approaches to international relations and studies on South American regional integration in recent decades constitute our theoretical framework (Cardinale and Winer, 2022; Ferretto and Picasso, 2018; González and Perrotta, 2021; Manzano, 2015; Valdés, 2003). In this way, we attempt to build situated theory to understand the processes taking place in our region. Based on those approaches, we explore and describe the creation and development of the Permanent LGBTI Commission, under the auspices of the Meeting of High Authorities on Human Rights and Chancelleries of MERCOSUR and Associated States (RAADDHH). We aim to identify how issues related to gender diversity have been addressed in South America. That means, to recognize from which perspectives were these discussions introduced in the regional integration process, which have been the most relevant actors and how have they contributed to the construction of meanings about the region and of a political proposal for regional development, but also of policies focused on these groups. To this end, we first make a theoretical review of the contributions of feminisms —mainly those that draw on international relations and approaches to gender diversity— and regional integration studies that allow us to frame our discussions. Focusing on the MERCOSUR regional integration process, we recognize that the inclusion of the sexual diversity Agenda belongs to a new stage in the region in which several new issues are being addressed and new actors are being included (Perrotta, 2010, 2013; Perrotta and Porcelli, 2019; Sanahuja, 2008; Vazquez, 2019; Velo and Perrotta, 2020). We can mention, for example, the participation of social actors in regional decision-making, the construction of a notion of regional citizenship, or the approach to issues such as family farming or science and technology (González, 2015, 2016). At the same time, other Agendas that were created during the first years of MERCOSUR creation were deepened in these years (such as, for example, the educational or women's Agenda). Secondly, we explore the construction of an Agenda for the LGBTI+ collective in MERCOSUR in two stages. In the first stage, we present the most relevant antecedents for the creation of this space within the bloc: the Specialized Meeting on Women (REM), the Meeting of Ministers and High Authorities on Women (RMAAM) and the RAADDHH. In a second stage, the institutional path that led to the installation of the LGBT Permanent Commission in 2015 is presented, focusing on the dynamics of the functioning of this space, the governmental and social actors involved and the issues addressed. It is concluded that, similarly to what is happening in other Western international spaces, the countries of the region have sought to incorporate the issue within a broader perspective of human rights, thus contributing to place the topic as an international issue that is also close to the foreign policy approaches promoted from the region itself and from South American Countries. Another important conclusion is that social actors played an important role: in this process, LGBTI+ civil society organizations had a notable and uninterrupted presence, influencing the perspectives adopted. It also opens up new questions that balance to some extent the achievements described while opening up a rich research Agenda linked to the role of social actors and the implications of these discussions for the further elaboration of public policies, especially in a global context of apparent regression in terms of human rights and the rights of these groups: To what extent did the demands of the organizations of the sector constitute the driving force for the promotion of LGBTI+ rights? What are the reasons why some organizations participate in the regional space while others seem to remain outside of it? Did this space allow for the creation of solidarity networks of the organizations of the sector within their territories and then at the regional level? Did the inclusion of these rights as human rights allow for a change in the social and political perception of the collective? Did it or did it not contribute to a process that implies thinking about how and for whom the region is built?

A qualitative methodological strategy is used (Marradi et al., 2007; Vasilachis de Gialdino, 2014; Whittemore et al., 2001). The research design adopted is flexible. It seeks, at the same time, to bring new perspectives to an area of knowledge that has been, in certain senses, explored and to place these new perspectives in dialogue with areas that have been little studied. We privilege a view that allows us to account for new and unexpected situations related to the area under investigation (Whittemore et al., 2001) We also rely on the case study (Stake, 1995). The study carried out is at the same time exploratory, descriptive and analytical. For data collection, bibliographic and documentary review and qualified informants were used through semi-structured interviews. The data obtained are analyzed based on grounded interpretation (Stake, 1995) and their treatment consists of a critical analysis of the content.