by Carmen Tornaria
In 1985, the Uruguayan people elected Jose Maria Sanguinetti, their first civilian president in more than 12 years. Once known as the "Switzerland of Latin America" for its long tradition of liberal democracy, Uruguay turned to military dictatorship in 1973 amid mounting social unrest and a growing urban guerrilla movement. Years of repression and economic decline followed until public protest and an organized opposition movement eventually brought about the recent return to democracy.
Carmen Tornaria, Uruguayan feminist and correspondent for the Latin American journalists' network FEMPRESS, discusses the rise of women's organizations against this changing political background.
Women have played a major role in Uruguay's transition to democracy yet, in 1985, we're still conspicuously absent from all levels of central decision-making. Except for the Ministry of Education which has a woman in charge, the government and parliament consist entirely of men. This also applies to the leaders of all four political parties, the executive of the students' federation and the central workers' organization.
Take boards of education, the media and business and the story is the same: very few women and certainly none in positions of power. Against this background more and more women's groups are being formed, alongside a new and growing awareness of the need to question and challenge the existing order.
The Dictatorship Sweeps Away a Few Myths
Although Uruguayan society shares much of the patriarchal character of the rest of Latin America, women's subordination has been maintained through a particularly subtle form of machismo related to specific ideological elements in our country's history. This "subtle machismo" stems from a long period of democracy, preceding the years of authoritarian rule, which allowed certain myths to prosper until they finally took on a semblance of reality.
Two of these myths, derived and nurtured from the beginning of this century, are directly related to the position of women. The first concerns the "illusion of equal citizenship," promoted by the existence of a vigorous middle class that for a long time helped • to slow down and obscure social conflict. This ideal of equal citizenship led to the concept that there was equality between the sexes, to be backed up by the early acquisition of women's civil rights and the right to vote (around 1940).
The other myth to prosper was that of the "magical power of law." The existence of certain progressive laws in the field of work and other social areas, some related specifically to women, resulted in the more or less collective notion that the very existence of a law was enough to imply its enforcement. Although this relatively progressive legislation contributed to the fact that women's subordination never attained quite the same crude levels of other Latin American countries, much of the legislation was still confined to paper.
This kind of "oblivion to injustice" which characterized Uruguay during the first half of the twentieth century led to a degree of harmony in which myths were able to prosper. Despite openings in the education system, most women's aims continued to revolve around the traditional feminine ideal of mother, wife and servant. The concept of "a woman's place is in the home" went on flourishing as if it was perfectly natural; and women who did work outside mainly took jobs which virtually amounted to an extension of their domestic duties, for instance in the nursing, teaching or social work professions.
The first feminist impulse in Uruguay centered on civil rights and, especially, the right to vote. However, the kind of discussion being held by the suffragettes made little impact on women in the popular sectors. Changes at the grassroots level were to come later.
No country escaped the global crisis which took place towards the end of the sixties. In Uruguay, the inability of political opposition groups to come up with an alternative productive program to the Welfare State paved the way for the dictatorship which took over in June 1973. It was this installation of an authoritarian model, the values of which were quite alien to the way of life and national spirit of the Uruguayan people, which finally forced us to revise, analyze and question the old myths.
The Public Invades the Domestic Sphere
The advent of the dictatorship was accompanied by a dramatic breaking of traditional channels of political action and participation. Distinctions between the public world (almost entirely dominated by men) and the domestic (almost entirely run by women) began to blur, provoking a totally radical change in social relations. The home and the family suddenly became important dynamic centers of discussion, criticism and clandestine resistance. Myths tumbled as people saw laws violated daily in the name of national security, and witnessed the crushing of equality time and time again according to the rules of neo-iiberalism. Exile, prison, destitution and torture were experienced by men and women alike, and many mothers and fathers were forced to swap roles. In this situation the working woman's hand became an essential reserve against hunger.
Women's Groups in the Context of Popular Resistance
After a hard and valiant beginning, toward 1980 new forms of organization began to flourish, like the running of popular soup kitchens, cooperative movements and groups to help the mothers and families of political prisoners. At the same time, neighborhood women's groups began to appear, most of them initiated by housewives.
These were all spontaneous, pluralist, autonomous movements largely concerned with addressing general problems such as hunger, unemployment, human rights, housing, democratic elections and inflation. Following a women's march in January 1984, the Plenario de Mujeres del Uruguay (Plenary of Uruguayan Women) was formed with the aim of coordinating women's participation in the struggle against the dictatorship. At the same time a quite new women's consciousness was beginning to develop.
Towards a Specific Reflection
The participation of women in neighborhood groups brought to light certain problems and inspired us to start reflecting about ourselves as women. For instance, where could we leave our children during meetings? Who would prepare the meals when we weren't there? "Fm late because I had to do the washing." "He says the best way I can help is to stay at home and look after the children and cook." These were some of the topics of conversation which cropped up until finally, through talking together and questioning our own situations, we realized that we weren't dealing with the unique problems of Clara or Ines but with aspects of a common problem derived from our position as women.
We met for almost a year, during which time we not only identified our specific problems but, more important, discovered that we were no longer prepared to leave the solutions "until later." With the help of resources such as the feminist paper La Cacerola and the Women's Alternative Communication Unit Mujer ILET, which provided a theoretical perspective to our spontaneous thoughts as well as supplying information about the activities of women in other Latin American countries, an exciting new awareness was incorporated into our collective groups.
A Question of Autonomy
The approach of elections, scheduled for early 1985, and consequent opening up of democracy led to a restructuring of traditional forms of participation and a resurgence of the trade-union movement, but for women it wasn't a time of great change. All political parties included in their programs proposals for improving the condition of women, formulated by women's groups from each party. However, this was chiefly an electoral gambit, the best proof being the lack of women at any decision-making levels, not to mention our total absence from the lists of candidates.
The problems we experienced in determining how to relate to existing political organizations are undoubtedly similar to those of women's movements in many different countries. Lots of women were drawn into political parties, only to find themselves, as usual, confined to peripheral tasks; some tried to combine party politics with autonomous organization, leading to other problems; and, finally, there were those of us who discovered that autonomous organization alone provided the essential tools for changing our condition, while simultaneously protecting us from all attempts at mediation by political parties. At that moment in Uruguay it was the only way we had of guaranteeing that our message wouldn't be usurped or abused for other purposes.
Towards a Unity of Women
Public attention during and immediately after the elections was very much focused on the experience of the so-called Concertacioin Nacional Programatica (Agreement for a National Program), CONAPRO, which represented an attempt on the part of political parties, social forces, managers and unions to arrive at a minimal common program for the restoration of democracy. In the beginning it was entirely closed to women, so we proposed the creation of a working group within CONAPRO in order to "outline our specific demands. The all-male Executive, however, wasn't prepared to act on it.
As an autonomous pluralist organization, the Plenary of Uruguayan Women responded by calling a meeting of all women's groups in the country. On November 17. ^984. for the first time in our history more than 70 women delegates from political, social, trade-union, religious and academic bodies set to work on an analysis and proposals for improving the condition of women in Uruguay. This meeting was immediately followed by a series of weekly sessions until, twenty days later, the Executive Committee of CONAPRO authorized the creation of a coordinating working group on the condition of women.
Members of the Plenary planning group and new coordinating group worked alongside each other until February 15. This parallel activity undoubtedly explains how we were able to achieve so much in just three months. We put together five documents on women and education, media, work, health, the judicial system and organization, each containing an analysis and set of proposals outlining specific areas of concern. After approval from CONAPRO they today form part of a common program which both the political forces of trade union and management have pledged to follow.
The CONAPRO group responsible for the specific concerns of women consisted of delegates from four political parties, the central workers' organization, the students" federation, chambers of industry and social groups, including the Plenary, the National Association of Women Journalists and the National Women's Council. The Study Group on the Condition of Women and the Uruguayan Association for Family Planning and Investigation into Human Reproduction also took part as advisers.
When CONAPRO ceased to exist after the elections we decided to continue the working group under the title Concertacion de Mujeres (Women's Agreement) with two main objectives: dissemination of the approved documents and their use for mobilizing action: and the production of three more papers on the subject of rural women, young women and older women.
Keeping together wasn't easy. The group's strength undoubtedly lay in the force of our convictions: we all recognized our common bond as women, despite political and philosophical differences: and the groups engaged in taking concerted action always managed to retain their own autonomy in a constructive atmosphere of mutual respect. Together with other women's organizations, on March 8, 198.S we commemorated International Women's Day with the common theme "Women don't only want to give life, we want to change it."