Rede brasileira de mulheres cientistas (RBMC): um estudo sobre ativismo digital, experiências e ideias sobre gênero na saúde coletiva

Abstract

Gender inequality is a historical, structural, complex problem that oppresses, segregates and violates women in multiple ways, limiting their existence. With the Covid-19 pandemic, the situation of women was aggravated by challenges inherent to the public health emergency situation and the dismantling of rights that occurred during the period, at the same time that it gained space in the public debate as a form of denunciation, demand and pressure from the State. In this context, the Brazilian Network of Women Scientists (RBMC) constitutes an unprecedented experience of digital activism. Interdisciplinary in nature, RBMC brings together thousands of women working in different fields of knowledge, as well as linked to various teaching and research institutions across the country, including professors and researchers in Public Health. RBMC's experience encourages us to answer some questions: how does RBMC use social media to address gender issues and women's policies? Who are the researchers in the Public Health Field who are part of the Network and how do their personal, political and academic experiences relate to their ideas about gender, knowledge and public policy for women? The general objective is to understand the experiences and ideas of activists in the field of public health about gender, knowledge and public policies for women, considering the constitution and activities of the Brazilian Network of Women Scientists. This is a multi-method study of a qualitative nature that involves Framing Analysis (1st phase) to map and analyze the interpretative and news frames in RBMC interactions on social media; and Narrative Analysis (2nd phase) to understand the experiences and ideas of researchers in the field of collective health with notable work in the Network. The first phase of the research occurred with data recording, from its launch (April/2021) until April 2022. Despite the high concentration on RBMC platforms, events with partners, guests and dissemination of other initiatives on various social media were included. 767 publications were identified in the mentioned period. In the second stage, starting in the second half of 2022, we checked the registration of 3,609 researchers who are part of the RBMC with the list of teachers and students on the Sucupira Platform. Thus, we identified 345 linked to the Public Health Field. Among these, 21 were selected due to their participation in at least 01 Network activity (Technical Notes, Lives, Interviews, Videos, Projects, etc.) in their first year of operation. Before contacting those selected, the research was submitted to Plataforma Brasil for consideration and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Ceará (CEP/UFC) (Opinion number 5,726,953). The results show 05 frames: Movement and Articulation; Health and Pandemic; Science and Education; Public Policy, State and Law; e Gender Inequality. The identified frames constitute the communication established on social networks and digital media. They reveal the interactions and themes addressed by RBMC, revealing the intersectional issues that cross them. After identifying the situations, we intentionally chose one of them for an in-depth analysis, considering its centrality to the RBMC, that is, “gender inequality”. The “gender inequality” framework on social media denounces the delegitimization of science and Covid-19 as aggravating factors of an already vulnerable existence (structurally and historically); emphasizes violence that weakens public policies, creates insecurity and causes a risk of death; mainly highlights the severity in relation to poor, black women and women from peripheral territories; constitutes a cluster of efforts by researchers from different fields of knowledge in order to increase the visibility of gender issues and intersectionalities, influence the public agenda and ratify scientific non-neutrality. The analysis of the narratives (2nd phase) highlighted personal experiences with gender inequality that demonstrate the fragility of the boundaries between public and private; as violence, with a certain variation, accompanies them at all stages of life, but mainly in relation to motherhood and the occupation of other sociability spaces that generate overload while revealing the indispensability of a support network. Political experiences reveal an approximation with feminist and women's movements, specific and continuous actions, partisan and non-partisan, in participation and social control and civil society organizations; as well as study groups and academic work, which also uses the knowledge they produce as support for the actions in which they participate. Academic experiences reinforce how the overload of care in relation to motherhood impacts their lives and how the academic space disregards these issues; This fact triggered criticism of a way of doing science that reproduces a system of intersectional (gender, ethnic-racial, ageist, regionalist) and sickening oppressions, which lead them to strategic actions such as preparation, retreat and articulations for a collaborative science. Including how being a scientist is still tied to traditional stereotypes and can promote an inclusive and counter-hegemonic science in its achievements; mainly in the field of Public Health, described as welcoming to women and gender issues, despite their tensions. The relationship between gender, collective health and public policies for women is treated as relevant, which demands the occupation of spaces of power and the rapprochement between gender studies and collective health as fundamental to confronting political setbacks and envisioning possibilities that ensure interventions powerful through investments, policies, competitions, selections, notices and rights that ensure the access and permanence of women in science and public policies from and with a gender perspective. Among narrated experiences, RBMC brings together characteristics of an approach based on contacts and networks of professionals, with the potential to channel reliable knowledge and ideas via academic digital activism; but also with contradictions that, in addition to bringing people together, can alienate members. The RBMC is important, but not yet essential, for strengthening gender studies in the Public Health Field; This is part of a collective construction, which, according to the narratives, needs to go further to adapt to the demands of the scientists involved and society, not excluding, but starting with face-to-face discussions, expanding institutional articulations, however, maintaining their autonomy. The study contributes by revealing a representation of tensions, contradictions and persistent historical and intersectional demands, particularly in the field of Public Health. The junction between science and activism/academic-social mobilizations are potential for implementing a public policy agenda focused on gender equity and social justice.