“Proteção sem promoção”: ambivalências antigênero no Ministério da Mulher, da Família e dos Direitos Humanos do Governo Bolsonaro

Abstract

This thesis addresses the incorporation of anti-gender offensives into Brazilian political institutions through the Executive Branch, focusing on the Ministry of Women, Family, and Human Rights (MMFDH) under the Bolsonaro administration, led by Damares Alves. Anti-gender offensives are understood as mobilizations against gender and sexuality themes, initiated by the Vatican at the end of the 20th century. Nowadays, these offensives are transnationally articulated by actors of various religious, ideological, and political backgrounds, unified by the syntagm "gender ideology". In Brazilian institutional politics, such dynamics were usually produced and managed by parliamentarians, characterized by violence and hate speech, as seen in the "kit gay" controversy that began in 2011. However, it is noteworthy that there was a change starting with the Bolsonaro government, when combating “gender ideology” became a priority for the Executive Branch. An affective and emotional change is perceived in the conduct of the policy, epitomized by the statement “protection without promotion” of issues related to gender, sexuality and the LGBT+ population. Following this premise, the research focused on constructing scenes of ambivalence, using journalistic and media materials, as well as documents from the “Diário Oficial da União” and the “Portal da Transparência do Governo Federal”, to trace the affective and emotional dimensions of different policies implemented by the MMFDH. This methodology was defined by correlating studies of affects and emotions with Jacques Rancière's method of equality, resulting in compositions, descriptions, and analyses derived from a "weak theory" that seeks to describe rather than explain objects of investigation, refusing to undermine reality through totalizing understandings. Through this approach, it was possible to trace a mobilization of positive affects such as love, acceptance, and optimism, correlated in an innovative way with negative affects like paranoia, fear, and hatred against sexual and gender diversity. This ambivalence was perceived in rhetoric and institutional arrangements, especially in the transfer of financial resources, which altered the zones of antagonism and alliance between the State and social organizations. With these procedures, it was possible to understand the innovation of "protection without promotion," highlighting how affects and emotions are substantial to political practice.