This article examines the role of the Pentecostal Evangelical movement in the success of the ‘No’ campaign in the Colombian peace plebiscite of 2 October 2016, where Colombians voted to reject the peace agreement which had been reached between the Colombian government and the Armed Revolutionary Forces of Colombia (FARC). It discusses the reasons that motivated large sectors of the Evangelical electorate to oppose the agreement, paying particular attention to the success of the argument that the agreement was contaminated with what Pentecostals termed ‘gender ideology.’ In terms of methodology, the article draws on a variety of sources, including interviews, field observation and written sources both scholarly and popular, including press and Internet articles. We track how ‘gender’ comes to be shorthand for the host of social ills with which it was associated during the debates around the Colombian peace plebiscite through use of the term ‘gender ideology’. We posit that it is the links between ‘gender’ modernity, colonialism and the development industry, its academic, value-neutral quality and its status as an isolated technical term that allow ‘gender’ to become a proxy for a wide range of social dissatisfactions. We conclude that the success of the ‘No’ campaign was possible due to the convergence of several sectors of society, particularly between the political right and a social movement which, inspired by religious values, opposed the recognition of LGBTI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex) rights and the use of the term ‘gender’ in the agreements.
The authors wish to make the following corrections to (Beltrán and Creely 2018) [...]
El artículo intenta hacer un aporte a la comprensión del papel que tuvo el movimiento evangélico pentecostal en el triunfo del “No” en el plebiscito celebrado en Colombia el 2 de octubre del 2016, plebiscito que buscaba refrendar el Acuerdo de paz pactado entre el gobierno colombiano y las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC). Se pregunta por los motivos que llevaron a un amplio sector del electorado evangélico a oponerse a la refrendación del Acuerdo y, particularmente, se pregunta por la importancia que el seno del pentecostalismo tuvo en el argumento según el cual el Acuerdo estaba viciado por lo que los pentecostales denominaron la “ideología de género”. En términos metodológicos, el relato se nutre de una amplia diversidad de fuentes, entre las que se destacan entrevistas, observaciones de campo, revisión de prensa e información disponible en internet. Hacemos un seguimiento de cómo “género”, gracias a la expresión “ideología de género”, se transformó en una abreviatura que encapsula una diversidad de males sociales. Durante la campaña del plebiscito la “ideología de género” se asoció con problemas propios de la modernización, el colonialismo y la llamada “industria del desarrollo”. Se concluye que el triunfo del “No” fue posible por la convergencia de intereses de diversos sectores sociales, particularmente, de la derecha política y de un movimiento social que, inspirado en valores religiosos, se opone al reconocimiento de los derechos de la población LGBTI (Lesbianas, Gais, Bisexuales, Trans, Intersexuales).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.