This report synthesises learning from audits which were undertaken in Philippines, China, Brazil, India and South Africa. It is part of a larger project that focuses on understanding the links between sexuality, gender plurality and poverty with the aim of improving socioeconomic policy and programming to support people marginalised because of their sexuality. The project was instigated as a result of earlier research, which indicated that sexuality is directly related to physical, social and economic wellbeing, political participation and socioeconomic inclusion and the realisation of human rights, particularly for the poor and most marginalised.
Key findings:
- There are clear links between sexuality and poverty. Non-normative sexual desires, relationships and behaviour can constrain employment opportunities, affect people’s ability to benefit from the informal economy, curtail opportunities for education, limit access to health care and other essential services, prevent people from coming together to act in their own interests and lead to alienation, marginalisation and community and state-sanctioned violence.
- Poverty reduction programmes and economic policies need to be analysed for heteronormativity, to make visible the underlying assumptions about relationships and family forms, and to examine if they are excluding certain groups, or reinforcing unequal and oppressive relationships. Poverty reduction efforts must address the needs of people with stigmatised sexualities, including targeting specific initiatives to these groups. International donors need to examine their own policies and practices from these angles, and to start a dialogue with partners on these issues.
- Despite this, sexuality is neglected within development policy and practice often on the understanding that this issue will be dealt with once more ‘pressing’ material needs have been addressed. Where the development sector has engaged with sexuality, for example through public health interventions, this has often focused more on regulation and the assertion of power than facilitating access to fundamental freedoms and entitlements (Gosine 2009; Harcourt 2009). Sexuality has been addressed in development with respect to sexual violence in the context of heterosexual women, but issues around pleasure and sexuality-related marginalisation has not. Importantly, heteronormativity impacts even those at the top of the sexual hierarchy, so whilst our concern includes, it must go beyond marginalised groups and identities.
Suggestions for action include:
- The need to deepen and replicate the policy audits:There is very little research evidence on the links between sexuality and poverty in low- and middle-income countries. Conducting the policy audits was methodologically challenging yet it uncovered new ways of thinking about old, seemingly intractable development issues as well as highlighting the ways in which people marginalised because of their sexuality are excluded from the benefits of development. Our recommendation is that further support is provided for ongoing investigation of the topics reviewed by the audits in China, South Africa, the Philippines, Brazil and India and for advocacy with the results gathered so far, as well as to expand this type of investigation to other topics in other countries.
- Opening up and furthering discussions about sexuality and poverty: The audit authors discovered that it is often difficult to speak about sexuality and that uncovering the links between sexuality and poverty can bring its own challenges, for example the risk of backlash from conservative actors or poorly constructed interventions on the part of development practitioners. This points to the importance of supporting progressive sexuality movements to dialogue on these issues amongst themselves and as part of their ongoing advocacy with decision-makers. We recommend that support is provided for meetings and movement building in a variety of low- and middle-income countries to allow for further exploration of the links between sexuality and poverty, to reach out to potential new allies and to formulate common positions.
- Capitalising on the synergies between different movements and thematic areas concerned with sexual rights: There are many civil society, activist and academic groups based around issues like gender-based violence, women’s rights and sexual and reproductive health that have not fully engaged with issues related to sexuality and poverty. The policy and practice of international agencies concerned with poverty also deal inadequately with this issue. We recommend that donor agencies encourage their grantees to consider sexuality and poverty in their ongoing work and that they integrate these issues into their own policy development mechanisms, recognising (as has emerged from the audits) that sexuality does not automatically mean LGBT. This may include training for new staff members on these issues, the creation of tools and guidance to shape funding and policy decisions, capacity development with grantees, the formulation of supportive policy positions within international policymaking and norm-shaping processes, etc. It could also include asking LGBT grantees to actively bring voices in from economically marginalised sections of their communities.
- Further investigation of the influence of religion on sexuality and poverty:It is common knowledge that US-sponsored Christian campaigns in a variety of African countries have led to growing homophobia. As well as propagating Christian ideas about what is acceptable in terms of sexual behaviour and family life, these campaigns bolster the positions of ‘conservative’ actors within the American church whose viewpoints are not necessarily representative of the wider congregation. This is a complex area and one that is poorly understood. We recommend that funders provide support for research that seeks to track and better understand the harmful influence of dogmatic religion on the furthering of sexual rights agendas, as well as examining opportunities for progressive engagement.
- A better understanding of those groups acting against sexual rights: Conservative actors, whether from civil society or within government, tend to see sexual and reproductive health and rights issues as interconnected. There is often a conflation of issues like access to safe abortion and improvements in equality and non-discrimination legislation to protect the rights of homosexuals. Yet those people working on sexual and reproductive health and rights have failed to address the issue of sexuality and poverty in a meaningful and joined-up manner. We recommend further support to advocacy organisations which can monitor and reveal the ways in which less progressive groupings engage with policy processes.