Las acciones afirmativas como políticas públicas de igualdad de género en un estado constitucional de derechos

Abstract

Affirmative action public policies, also known as positive discrimination policies, have been implemented in Ecuador with the aim of mitigating the multiple factors that cause conditions of discrimination and inequality. Most of all, those that are based on social constructions of gender. According to Rawls (2001, p. 29) “Undeserved inequalities require compensation; and since the inequalities of birth and natural gifts are undeserved, they will have to be compensated in some way”. Thus, the creation of the famous affirmative actions is justified, having as a fundamental pillar the right to gender equality that is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador. However, in recent times, several questions have emerged. For example: Why, despite legislative progress in the field of human rights, are there still such marked phenomena of inequality ?; What is stopping a change in the culture and in the symbolic references of the masculine and feminine ?; Are the affirmative actions implemented in Ecuador really working to generate gender equality or do they only reinforce sexist stereotypes ?; How do the design of public policies with a gender perspective based on social constructions of stereotypes affect the social imaginary? The problem that this research work aims to focus on is precisely the impact of the results generated by the application of affirmative actions in our environment. In such a way that it is demonstrated how those, contrary to precautionary the constitutional right of gender equality, are violating it, strengthening the social stereotypes between men and women. As explained in the previous paragraphs, affirmative actions are being created, not only in Ecuador but in various parts of the world. Thus, they are taken as a means of reducing violence and inequality between men and women. However; The present investigation will criticize that this type of affirmative action implies in itself a reinforcement of stereotypes and protection messages for a certain group that needs special measures by the State. Consequently, said situation generates contradiction and debate regarding gender equality as a constitutional right.