The green scarf is distinctive of the National Campaign for the Right to Free and Safe Legal Abortion of Argentina. Historical heir to the white scarf of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, in 2018 it was adopted as an emblem that articulates the claims for reproductive rights in Latin America. This article investigates its history and the relationship it weaves with the human rights movement and the transnationalization of feminisms, with a focus on its circulation in Argentina and Mexico. We suggest that the green scarf, as a traveling symbol and cognitive bridge, ties together different identities and modes of political intervention of contemporary feminisms, identifies and mobilizes, and at the same time leaves particularities and differences in latency, opens up to new alliances, generates debates and produces responses.

Dithin the framework of violence and human rights crisis in Mexico, the foundations have been laid for a new wave of forced internal displacement in the country, leaving thousands of Mexican families in extreme vulnerability and in complete abandonment. In the face of this, the Mexican State has maintained a reluctant position to recognize the problem and, consequently, has not taken the pertinent actions to improve the quality of life of this population, making it impossible for them to effectively exercise their human rights. The following text presents the approach to the problem in Mexico from the experience of the Mexican Commission for the Defense and Promotion of Human Rights (CMDPDDH), a civil society organization that works in research, analysis, visibility, advocacy and comprehensive support to victims of the phenomenon.

In December 2006, the president of Mexico, Felipe Calderón, declared the “war against drugs” and called out the Army to confront criminal groups in the streets. This public security task does not correspond specifically to the functions of the Armed Forces and, among other consequences, has led to a disproportionate increase in homicides and disappearances in the country. Despite this, the Internal Security Law is presented, which institutionalizes this militarization process and justifies, regulates and legalizes the role of the armed forces in the fight against organized crime. There are many questions that arise in this context and we hope that the guests of this Discrepancies section will contribute to animate the debate, perhaps to clarify it.