In Andean academia, a highly conservative environment, gender as a category of analysis has been an elusive and poorly understood concept. Despite the fact that in many countries of the Northern Hemisphere (where Euro-American knowledge is constructed), as well as South American countries, historians and anthropologists working from feminist perspectives have used gender theory since the 1980s, it is only in the 2010s that Andeanist scholars have begun to fully acknowledge that almost all historical narratives (from the Pre-Hispanic, Colonial, Republican and Contemporary Periods) excluded women as actors in all-important historical processes. As many Andean countries reevaluate their national republican discourses while celebrating the bicentennial of their independence, this flaw has become more evident. Hegemonic and historical accounts of South American independence movements, which highlight critical events and important historical figures, have focused on male figures and republican ideals mostly based on masculine values. Disseminating history from a masculine viewpoint, these narratives ignore women and other marginalized social groups, including indigenous and Afro-descendant communities, and fail to recognize their role as agents of political change. Consequently, using these narratives in the construction of national identities and citizenship has created social inequalities. The exclusion of women and nonbinary gender identities from the narrative has been noticed and acknowledged not only by academics, but also by society in general. Therefore, academic institutions and nonprofit organizations have promoted the publication and investigation of gender topics in history. However, archaeology, an isolated discipline immersed in its own discussions and dynamics, has developed in its own way. In general, opportunistic discoveries of “great and powerful women” have positioned archaeologists (mostly men) and their interpretations of the Andean past and power in an uncomfortable position. How to interpret these contexts using societal models that envision female bodies and feminine collectivities in a perpetually subordinated role? How to understand them without the tools of feminism and decolonial and anthropological theory? How to construct complex roles for Andean women in the past from a place in the present where that seems impossible and unimaginable (or even subversive)? From an Andean political awakening that takes a deep historical perspective, gender theory is under (de)construction. The topic of gender and history in the Andes is not about placing some female figures and mixing them up in an already hegemonic history; it is about creating innovative visions of the past, where multiple historical voices from the past and present appear.
Abortion, embryos, euthanasia, and gender theory: an anthropological analysis of the Catholic Church’s Bioethics Manual at World Youth Day