In the previous year, women’s rights organisations were bracing themselves for a new Trump administration. The ensuing chaos was largely unforeseen. The flood and velocity of executive orders originating in the White House were viewed as a calculated strategy to overwhelm and create panic. The tactic proved effective – there was chaos, resentment, and burnout as networks struggled to fill the gap left by a freeze on international development funds. But the situation was about to worsen.
The Trump administration has been the central catalyst, complemented by fervent lobbying efforts by deeply conservative factions exploiting the situation to build worldwide connections with ideological partners.
The anti-rights movement signifies a transnational grouping of policymakers, doctrinal establishments, and activist outfits as well as billionaire families and individuals that strive to weaken forward movement on multiple topics. This encompasses pro-choice policies, equality for sexual minorities, gender identity recognition, and inclusive relationship teaching.
They accomplish their goals by pressuring states, backing lawsuits, disparaging UN work to push for parity, disseminating propaganda, and supporting ideologically-matched groups.
We look at five moments that shaped the safety, dignity and lives of females globally.
In March, six weeks after a key American development organization is frozen, causing turmoil around the world, a senior US official states that the lion's share of the body's projects will be terminated. American foreign service officers, former presidents and humanitarian and health experts denounce the action, cautioning that lives will be lost. Rights defenders say that the demise of the agency is greater than a budgetary issue, it is a vicious offensive against basic liberties and access to contraception and reproductive health services. Many organisations say the impact on girls and women will be severe by reduced funding, especially in regions of instability. As the year ends, statistics reveal how a significant mortality toll has been exacted from disease, starvation, lack of access to maternal care and gender-based violence, with millions more to come. Two other major donor nations follow with their own cuts. A director of a global justice organization says a move to cut foreign aid drastically is a move to appease a political ally.
In March, several Christian-right organisations meet in an upmarket New York hotel for a two-day conference held concurrently with the annual UN Women gathering. It is an chance to exchange strategies on how to oppose what they term a UN overreach. They are in high spirits as they welcome new Washington directives on LGBTQ issues, inclusion, and reproductive rights. Meanwhile, the head of the United Nations opens the women’s summit with a stark warning that “the toxin of gendered hierarchy” is returning, after a study indicates that opponents of gender equality are deliberately weakening longstanding consensus on fundamental freedoms for women around the world.
Over the warmer months, a cluster of meetings in Africa themed around the conventional household and state autonomy triggers anxiety among rights advocates. In early May, a head of state and partner open a major forum to push back on what they label overseas agendas corrupting societal morals. A soon after, another Pan-African conference on traditional morals is held. Both events are attended by leading American and European conservative activists, including leaders of well-known groups. One speaker calls on African NGOs to resist “radical global social engineering” of multilateral bodies. In the following month, a prominent church hosts a family strengthening conference in the region, an event that pro-choice campaigners say has become a stage for criticizing gender equality. Campaigners note that the scale of their presence has increased markedly.
As medical centers in numerous African countries report they are running out of contraceptives, including post-rape care packages, the US announces in July plans to incinerate a vast stockpile of birth control held in a European depot. A global sexual health network states that their destruction will deny millions of women and girls from family planning options, and lead to a surge in unplanned pregnancies and dangerous terminations. The organization labels the plan an ideological decision “about forcing a conservative worldview globally” and “an intentional act of reproductive coercion”. A renowned doctors' group calls it “heartless and dangerous”. Charities attempt to acquire the contraceptives so they can be distributed to those in need, but the US refuses all offers. The situation remains at a standstill as host nation officials refuse to permit usable products to be destroyed.
Bringing back the anti-abortion funding ban, which prohibits Washington's support for groups that provide, advocate for or advise on abortion services overseas, is commonplace under certain US administrations. It was widely expected when the rule was reinstated in January. The administration also reaffirmed membership in a pro-life declaration. But in the autumn, the US announces it intends to broaden the scope of the policy to include governments and multilateral organisations in addition to NGOs, and to cover diversity programmes. Additional information regarding the expansion of the rule are expected in early 2026. A director of a major health partnership says broadening the policy will have “devastating consequences”. Advocates for bodily autonomy fear that fresh American assistance deals being discussed with African nations will become contingent upon adopting the broadened restrictions.
