Backlash from Women's Rights Defenders in Mexico Against the '#CuidarNosUne' Campaign: Complaint Filed

In the Tlaxcala state of Mexico, feminist activists and experts have filed a formal complaint with the State Human Rights Commission (CEDH) against officials from the State Women's Secretariat (SMET) and the Communication Coordination (CCOM). The subject of the complaint is that the campaign titled "#CuidarNosUne", published with the approval and dissemination of both institutions, contains serious rights violations despite its stated aim of combating violence against women. Activists argue that the campaign in question blatantly violates constitutional obligations and international human rights treaties. The complaint petition emphasizes that the public service announcement in question damages gender equality by using sexist language. The officials are demanding the immediate halt of the campaign, a public apology, and an investigation into the misuse of public resources.

The message contained in the campaign, which drew massive backlash, has become the focus of criticism due to its use of patriarchal language. The degrading expressions used in the advertisements, which imply that men abandon their parenting responsibilities and make references to sexuality, have been described by experts as absurd, clumsy, and contradictory. Activists note that such language creates a derogatory connotation regarding men's gender and personal worth. Furthermore, it is argued that the campaign deepens social polarization by associating women and men with negative social labels. Experts specifically emphasize that a state institution cannot use violent or discriminatory language, even for the purpose of preventing violence.

Prominent activists who made statements on the issue, such as Coral Ávila Casco, have stated that the institutions run their policies with a commercial marketing logic rather than a human rights perspective. Casco harshly criticized officials for describing the advertisement as successful solely because of the sensation and public agenda it created. Activists, noting that human dignity and rights cannot be seen as marketable or commercial commodities, reminded that the state's primary duty is to protect individuals from violence. Even though it is accepted by the institution that the language used was consciously chosen to attract attention, experts state that this approach is incompatible with the fundamental principles of a rights-based struggle. It is argued that achieving gender equality is only possible not by reproducing, but by destroying sexist stereotypes.

In this legal and social process, the complainants are demanding that the State Human Rights Commission launch a comprehensive investigation and immediately take the necessary precautionary measures. It is stated that the identities of the relevant public officials must be determined and that the campaign must be urgently removed or completely redesigned. Furthermore, it is requested that the matter be reported to the Internal Control Body or the Secretariat Against Corruption in order to audit whether public resources were spent on such a campaign. In addition to all these processes, a public apology from the institution and the initiation of a compensation process are demanded to remedy the victimization. Activists make it a condition that the relevant personnel undergo comprehensive gender equality and human rights training to prevent similar negligence in the future.

The incident highlights the need for a much more rigorous human rights threshold assessment during the preparation process of public service announcements and official communication strategies. The Communication Law and related legislation mandate the use of inclusive language, free from all forms of discrimination and violence, in institutional campaigns. However, this incident has revealed that theoretical legal regulations are sometimes ignored in practical applications and that there are serious oversight deficiencies. It has been understood once again that officials must not forget their heightened duty of protection, especially when conveying messages directed at women, children, and vulnerable groups. Ultimately, through the oversight of the public and civil society, it is aimed to prevent such rights violations and to ensure that state policies are truly framed within an egalitarian context.