In the past year, organizing committees in Germany have been accused of anti-Semitism for their stance on Palestine. The German state has imposed harsh law enforcement measures and police crackdowns, while German institutions have carried out suspensions from schools or threatened professional consequences.

“When someone asks me where I am from, I hesitate before saying Palestine. I always have to justify [myself]. Until two months ago, I was scared to even wear the keffiyeh [at university]. I was afraid they would think I was an extremist,” said a student in Munich, who requested anonymity.

But in October 2023 these political tensions were amplified: expressing political sympathies with Gaza or calling the war a ‘genocide’ was now affiliated with Islamist terrorism. A month later, the phrase “from the river to the sea” was officially classified as “Hamas-Parole” by the Federal Ministry of the Interior. To avoid legal consequences, such as losing their residency status or retaliation from academic staff, faculty, and colleagues, students have decided to refrain from further engaging in the political discourse on campus, distancing themselves from lectures and dialogues about Israel.

Germany’s unrelenting stance on Israel’s actions in Gaza has intensified a long era of repression among its Arab diaspora, which has also festered in German academia. Well before the war on Gaza began, students already feared expressing or sharing their Palestinian identity on campus.

This sense of alienation was further reinforced once it was revealed how closely German academia intertwines itself with Israeli institutions. For instance, the Technical University of Munich (TUM), maintains close ties with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Technion in Haifa, Israel. After October 7th, Thomas Hofmann, TUM’s president,  issued a statement declaring his personal support for the university’s Israeli partners and emphasizing the university’s solidarity with the Israeli people. At the time, over 1.500 people had been killed in the Gaza Strip, according to a report released by the World Health Organization. The university’s statement made no mention of Palestinian civilian casualties. 

Outraged by this ostensibly deliberate omission, TUM students collected over 1.000 signatures protesting the statement, demanding the inclusion of Gaza’s dead, to no avail.

Another student at TUM, who requested anonymity said: “He could have at least acknowledged to his Palestinian students, who were going through difficult times, and I don’t think it’s human to neglect the suffering of others.”

In a recently published document by the Munich-based activist group “Academics for Justice,” ongoing collaborations between German and Israeli academia revealed a concerning partnership with Ariel University (AU) in Ariel, in the central West Bank. 

AU prides itself for its “fresh perspective on contemporary Zionism,” and welcomes “new [Jewish] immigrants and Israeli researchers returning from abroad.” During Israel’s war on Gaza, approximately 4.000 of AU students were drafted into military service. A scholarship fund was set up for students who fought on the front lines, and exemptions and credit for tuition fees were provided to reservists.

Traditional media in Germany is shackled by outdated customs and stifling social norms that curb freedoms. 

AU was built atop one of the largest illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank and is rife with public controversies violating human rights and international law. Since its foundation, the university was met with sharp criticism–from Palestinians and Israelis alike. In 2012, AU was officially recognized as an Israeli university, thereby securing additional state funding. Outraged, over 1.200 Israeli faculty members from the organizing committee “Israeli Academics for Peace” signed a petition opposing this move. Since then many more have called for an end of international collaborations with the university. 

Photo: Ariel University- Located in an illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied Palestinian territory – West Bank –

In their 52-page report, Academics for Justice also referenced a post from 2022, shared on Linkedin by the AAIR lab, part of TUM’s Chair of Structural Informatics, advertising a joint PhD program between AU and TUM. One of the benefits listed was a “dormitory” in Ariel, effectively encouraging students to apply for a position that would grant them the opportunity to live on occupied Palestinian territory, thereby validating Israel’s plans to repopulate the West Bank. In addition, multiple research collaborations with AU were listed throughout the report, some as recent as December 2024. 

“I don’t think the university is taking anything or anyone in relation to Palestine seriously,” a student, who requested anonymity, said: “We contacted the administration, the professors, and some of us even spoke with the TUM-president. He didn’t even care. We were ghosted or ignored, so you can see where their priorities and interests lie.” 

In the latest escalation, TUM’s students and academic staff requested an open dialogue with their university to discuss collaborations with AU. After the about thirty participants gathered in the seminar room for the discussion, police suddenly locked the doors from outside, as was documented by “University for Palestine,” a grassroots movement advocating for Gaza, and Academics for Justice. 
Students and staff were accused of allegedly “trespassing” on public grounds. At the same time, they weren’t given an option to leave the facilities. Instead, they were detained, searched.

“We were locked up–like animals. It was a trap,” says one student activist who is now also facing criminal charges. “The police must have prepared for it at the university. I can’t understand why they would lure their own students and employees into such an ambush. How can that be?”

It’s evident that after over a year of its ardent backing of Israel, Germany has severed its connection to its Arab students. But other European academic institutions show that there can still be hope. 

Universities in Belgium, Ireland, and Norway have distanced themselves from several Israeli universities and research institutions for their involvement in human rights violations. After a flurry of student protests across the world, some universities, like Dublin’s Trinity College, agreed to divest from Israeli institutions and companies engaging in activities in the occupied Palestinian territories, while also granting scholarships to students from Gaza. 

Although such steps are only the beginning, and merely the first step towards more fair and democratic dialogue with university students, in accordance with international law, it’s time for Germany to reflect not only on its past, but also its present.

Go watch the film I Shall Not Hate by the talented Franco-American documentarian Tal Barda, and if you can, also read the book of the same name.

Izzeldin Abuelaish has endured the unimaginable. He has sought justice, but until now, in vain.

From his story of blood and pain emerges a personal crusade for reconciliation and the coexistence of two peoples, today more distant than ever.

Israel and Palestine. Two worlds, two different cultures, separated by the poison of hatred, which blinds and sows death in a schizophrenic and insane crescendo that erases every rule of national and international law.

And yet for years, in the name of these two peoples, Izzeldin Abuelaish has been fighting a deeply personal, but universal, war that overshadows and undermines the tragic war currently raging, demonstrating its illogicality and total uselessness.

It is a struggle profoundly different from the one fought with bombings and drones. It has different rules of engagement, different communication codes. It has an equally devastating impact but causes no death.

Izzeldin Abuelaish’s war is a war for peace. The word “war,” in reference to Dr. Abuelaish’s story and his global campaign against all forms of hatred and discrimination, is emptied of its sinister semantic weight and evokes the power of a benevolent force that spreads to deliver a message of love.

War can be a tool for achieving peace. But if the goal is Peace, and it is pursued through war, in between there are deaths, destruction, domination, desolation, and suffering.

Izzeldin Abuelaish fights for the salvation of his people, but he possesses no weapons that cause harm. His voice is the only weapon he has, and it becomes the tool to keep memory alive, to hold those responsible accountable for their crimes. It spreads like a virus, generating an indelible feeling of hope.

Izzeldin Abuelaish is a Palestinian doctor who, for years (he was the first Palestinian to do so), worked in an Israeli hospital. On one cursed night in 2009, an Israeli tank, positioned menacingly beneath his home in Gaza, bombed his daughters’ bedroom, killing three of them.

It was an enormous tragedy, reported live by Abuelaish himself during an Israeli news program, becoming one of the most dramatic iconic moments of the Israeli-Palestinian war.

Despite the overwhelming grief, Dr. Abuelaish immediately began to speak of peace and coexistence—defying every logic and expectation that would have seen him blinded by hatred and seeking revenge.

He sued the Israeli state only to obtain an apology (simply but symbolically, “Sorry”), but the outcome of his legal action is easy to predict. Yet he does not give up, he does not allow hatred to poison his thoughts, and he becomes an activist for peace and coexistence between the two peoples. He begins to make his voice heard and to spread his message of hope.

In memory of his daughters—Bessan, then 21, Mayar, 15, and Aya, 13—and his niece Noor, 17, Dr. Abuelaish founded the Daughters for Life Foundation, a charity that supports young women of Middle Eastern nationalities, regardless of their origin or religious affiliation, to access higher education.

Since that fateful 2009, the echo of his cry for peace has not faded; it is as strong and relevant as ever.

Speaking today about the coexistence of the Palestinian and Israeli peoples is a revolutionary act. It may be dismissed as a sterile exercise in romanticism, detached from an objective and realistic view of the endless conflict that has torn apart these two historic enemies for decades.

The term evokes a utopian scenario in which, finally, the two peoples recognize each other’s existence and dignity and live peacefully in mutual respect.

Coexistence is the presence of two distinct entities that do not renounce their identity but act to make their diversity an opportunity for harmony and cultural growth through the acceptance of the other and mutual enrichment.

Coexistence does not mean inclusion. It has a deeper value because it does not imply the existence of a subject that includes and decides how and when to include, according to a discriminatory logic that perpetuates ancient dynamics of domination and oppression.

What an extraordinary word, coexistence. It is universal, transversal, flexible, applicable to any context in which diversity and individual differences exist.

It is a way of seeing the world, resistant to the logic of domination, hatred, and revenge, which unexpectedly, in this tragic story, belongs to someone who, considering the wrongs he has suffered, should have very different terms in his vocabulary.

Such a strong and powerful message should receive legal recognition by a court, but law, as we know, is often subservient to reasons of state. This is a sad awareness, but it should not lead to surrender.

This is the story of Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish as told in the film I Shall Not Hate. The documentary opens the doors of Gaza for us and lets us breathe in the smell of death. But despite everything, thanks to the tenacity of its extraordinary protagonist, it manages to instill hope for a different future.

This film should be shown in schools, universities, and public squares. It should be made accessible and understandable to everyone.

Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish’s voice must become our voice. The voice of everyone. It’s never too late.

Clarifying the meaning of terms is a good starting point to introduce a current and meaningful topic such as gender identity and sexual orientation.

If we attempt to explain it through the analysis of one of the most successful Netflix series of recent years, understanding is certainly facilitated.

And the law?

The law can help us frame the phenomenon, but it’s not necessarily the best tool to understand it. It depends on the worldview and understanding of the human gender prevailing in a specific country and historical period, which shapes the thoughts and actions of legislators and interpreters.

It’s important to keep this truth in mind because while the law is a wonderful invention, it unfortunately reflects the influence of the “dominant culture,” which may not always foresee and promote the recognition and protection of the multiple forms of human gender.

Let’s begin with the semantic aspect.

If the term “gender” identifies the condition of being male or female assigned to an individual at birth based on their external genitalia, “gender identity” expresses a person’s sense of belonging to a gender, which can be female, male, or non-binary. It represents the perception that each individual has of themselves as male or female or sometimes as belonging to categories other than male or female.

Gender dysphoria refers to the emotional and cognitive discomfort related to the gender assigned to us and consists of a condition of misalignment between sex (or gender assigned at birth) and gender identity: it concerns all individuals who feel they belong to a gender different from the one assigned to them at birth or who do not feel they fully belong to either the female or male gender, or whose gender identity is fluid, oscillating between male and female over time.

Gender identity is a “spectrum” that connects the two extremes of male and female gender, within which we find Cisgender (indicating individuals who identify with the gender corresponding to their biological sex), Transgender (indicating a person who does not conform to expectations, roles, and attitudes associated with the gender assigned at birth), Transsexual (a transgender person who – not identifying with their biological sex – has begun a treatment process to modify their body towards the preferred gender), Non-binary (a term adopted by those who do not recognize the binary construction of gender, meaning the idea that there are only female and male genders; this definition includes both genderqueer people, who identify with a personal mix of the two genders, and genderfluid people, whose gender identity is fluid and oscillates between male and female), Agender (people who refuse to identify with a gender). From a biological perspective, there is also the condition of intersex, which concerns those individuals whose sex chromosomes, hormones, or genital organs are not exclusively male or female.

While gender identity concerns self-perception, sexual orientation relates to how one relates to others and indicates physical or romantic attraction to a person. Sexual orientation does not coincide with gender: they are two different things that can intersect in many ways.

There are many types of sexual orientation, and all (it needs to be emphasized, even shouted if necessary) deserve protection.

There are Heterosexuals (those who identify with a gender and are exclusively attracted to people of the opposite gender), Homosexuals (attracted to people of their same gender; this definition includes lesbian women and gay men), Bisexuals (who are attracted to both male and female genders), Pansexuals (who feel attraction regardless of the other person’s gender, thus including those with a fluid or non-binary identity), Asexuals (who do not feel sexual attraction towards people of either gender but are capable of experiencing deep emotions and establishing important relationships).

Sexual orientation is not a static condition but a fluid one that can change – more or less – over the years, even in adulthood. Many psychological and scientific studies show that having a fluid sexual orientation is not uncommon. Sexual fluidity is manifested in both males and females because the ability to change one’s sexual tendencies is innate in humans.

This diverse framework of one of the most intimate and discriminated spheres gives us a beautiful picture of the heterogeneity of the human gender, its inclinations, and its infinite ways of conceiving and practicing sexual pleasure.

Libido. Every discussion about sexuality, gender identity, sexual orientation should actually begin with this term. Because it’s around the theme of sexual pleasure that a curtain of taboos and prejudices often falls, preventing us from grasping its true essence: the inherently subjective nature of pleasure as an expression of the diversity of those who practice it.

Sexual education is rarely included in school curricula, and when it is taught, it often reduces to a generic warning about the risks of unprotected sex and the consequences of unwanted pregnancies.

The topic of libido is left to private experience, yet it would be an extraordinary form of education about diversity. Pleasure is subjective and, when sought and practiced lawfully, is something inherently normal. Explaining its matrix and implications could help combat stereotypes and prejudices, promoting greater understanding and tolerance in society.

If we want to find a parallel with the cinematic and television world (always useful considering the didactic value of cinema and television), we cannot fail to mention the British series “Sex Education,” which aired on Netflix for 4 seasons from 2019 to 2023.

It is a true television gem that has forever changed the way of narrating the sexuality of teenagers, giving us a finally realistic and inclusive representation of the different gender identities and sexual experiences of young people dealing with the anatomical and emotional aspects related to sex. Characters like Otis, Eric, Ola, and Lily offer a glimpse into the complexity of gender identity and the challenges that LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) people face in their daily lives.

The series reminds us of the importance of inclusive sexual education that takes into account all diversities. It is an anthem to freedom that uses the topic of sex as a means to talk about identity, friendship, respect, vulnerability, resilience, self-esteem. It should be screened in schools.

But let’s not digress and come to the law. Why talk about law after introducing topics such as gender identity, orientation, and sexual education?

Because the law is (and must be) a promoter of a culture opposed to any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It must contribute to creating conditions where lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people can fully enjoy their rights.

For years, the UN and the Council of Europe have been urging member states to adopt measures to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

In resolution 1728 (2010), adopted on April 29, 2010, concerning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe invites States “to ensure, in legislation and practice, the rights [of transgender people] (…) to obtain official documents reflecting the chosen gender identity, without the prior requirement of undergoing sterilization or other medical procedures such as sex conversion surgery or hormone therapy.”

At this point, we need to ask a question. Do these enunciations of principles and values that translate into virtuous and proactive legislative recommendations find fertile ground in the legislative production of individual states?

The answer is not always, not in all states, especially in those where the rights of individuals and families have a religious matrix that reflects on the recognition and protection of fundamental human rights.

The answer is not always, not in all states, especially in those where the law concerning individuals and families has a religious foundation that influences the recognition and protection of fundamental human rights.

An example of this is Iraq. In April 2024, the Iraqi Parliament passed a law criminalizing homosexual relationships and gender transitions, with penalties of up to 15 years in prison. The law also prohibits “any organization that promotes homosexuality in Iraq,” with a seven-year prison sentence for “promoting” homosexual relationships. It prohibits “the change of biological sex based on individual desires or inclinations” and imposes a penalty of one to three years in prison for anyone or any doctor involved in this transition.

At the European level, there is a cultural and legal evolution towards recognizing the right to gender identity as a fundamental component of personal identity.

In June 2018, the European Court of Justice recognized the validity of same-sex marriage in all member countries “under the free movement of persons” (this ruling does not concern the approval of same-sex marriage in individual member states but the validity that such an institution, if celebrated in the European Union, must be recognized in a state without such regulation).

In more and more European countries, such as Germany, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Norway, and Switzerland, officially changing gender will only require a simple self-declaration, and surgical interventions will no longer be necessary. In Italy, gender change has been recognized since 1982, but “surgical correction” of gender is required. However, thanks to two rulings of the Court of Cassation and one of the Constitutional Court, today it is sufficient to accompany the request for a gender change with the opinion of an expert who evaluates the psychological conditions and motivation behind such requests.

Despite these significant steps forward for the full recognition of LGBT rights, there are unfortunately still worrying regressions resulting from a conservative and reactionary politics.

In Italy, a bill (DDL Zan) that would have established protections against discrimination for LGBT people was recently rejected.

In the world, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people continue to be victims of attacks and hate crimes.

There is still much to be done.

The hope is that the law will take on an increasingly proactive role in achieving and enforcing virtuous objectives and in making rights and freedoms a consolidated reality in a given social and cultural context.

1st photo: Netflix series “Sex Education”

If Bella Baxter really existed and lived in our time, what social, cultural and legal obstacles would she encounter? Would she really be free to express herself, to discover the world, travel, meet people, have sex, love?

To answer this question we must first explain who Bella Baxter is.

Only after doing so – strictly without prejudice – can we try to understand what her fate would be in a society like ours.

Bella Baxter is the protagonist of the highly acclaimed film by the provocative director Yorgos Lanthimos Poor Creatures! played by an exceptional Emma Stone (winner of the Oscar for best actress).

Based on the novel of the same name by the Scottish writer Alasdair Gray and inspired by Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the film is an aesthetically perfect satire on the Victorian morality of the time (and, in general, on bigoted and prohibitionist thought), which finds in its protagonist the l the complete expression of a human being free from conditioning and hungry for knowledge, life, people, places.

Bella Baxter is a young woman who committed suicide in the Thames and is reborn thanks to the visionary genius of the surgeon Godwin Baxter – an amazing Willem Dafoe – who transplanted the brain of the child she was carrying in her womb into her skull.

The film follows the growth of Bella Baxter, a female Frankenstein with the cognitive abilities of a newborn baby who evolves, reaching an awareness of herself and her body which leads her, free and rebellious, to emancipate herself from any form of control and conditioning and to experience life in its many declinations.

Through a training trip between Lisbon, Alexandria in Egypt and Paris, Bella lives grotesque experiences animated by a boundless curiosity, discovers sex, prostitutes herself, dances as if no one is watching her, closes relationships and opens others, is interested in politics, art and culture, yields to the call of worldliness.

Much has been written about this film, about its meaning, about its ability to convey an image of a free and independent woman finally free from any patriarchal legacy. However, there was no shortage of criticism, many of which came from the female world itself which considers the narrative of such a strong and wild creature to be tainted by a purely male point of view which transforms the protagonist into a mere object of desire.

In reality, there is another point of view – less debated than the more immediate one relating to gender identity but equally powerful and enlightening – which deserves to be explored in depth and concerns the value of diversity embodied by the splendid and indomitable Bella Baxter.

The merit of the film is to raise many questions about the human condition and, in particular, about the various forms of expression of the diversity of mankind.

Using the conceptual and classificatory tools of medical and legal science, Bella Baxter could be considered a person with intellectual disabilities, precisely because of that asynchrony between body and brain which produces, at least in the initial phase of her rebirth, significant limitations.

Yet – and this is the strong and revolutionary message of the film – Bella Baxter, despite her limitations and her fragility, is a splendid thinking and feeling being with desires and aspirations, who gives us a different and more enlightened way of conceiving disability. A human condition – like many others – to which no feeling of commiseration or pietism should be connected. Therefore, not an illness, nor a misfortune.

Bella’s way of being and living generates a form of love in the viewer that transcends the need to label her, to catalog her. Bella likes her because she lives as she wants, because she is free to explore, experiment, know, act.

Can we say that this vision of the different or the disabled is rooted in our society, in our culture, in our national and international normative production?

Unfortunately, there is still a long way to go, but there are encouraging signs.

A paternalistic logic of mere protection prevails, especially on a regulatory level, which is offered by a superior subject in favor of a subordinate subject. In other words, we are still tied to a medical-individualist conception, based on the culture of ableism and deficit, which considers diversity and, in particular, disability as an individual problem to be eliminated or mitigated. As a condition of deficit which, depriving the subject of the possibility of living significant experiences, could never be rationally chosen or be a source of pride or identity claim.

In recent years, however, thanks also to the debate stimulated by Disability Studies and the achievements achieved by the Disability Rights Movement, there has been a subversion of the medical-individualist paradigm which has led to the emergence of a new way of conceiving disability, characterized by a critical approach towards the deficit model which defines behaviors only in terms of lack and normality.

Among these new paradigms, the social model of disability deserves to be mentioned, which has radically changed the point of view regarding the disabled person, identifying the solution to the problems linked to disability in the removal of barriers – environmental or deriving from the attitude of others – which prevent disabled person the full enjoyment of their rights and equal opportunities.

From a medical vision (the disabled person is sick and must be treated) we move to a vision focused on the individual-environment relationship, on the context in which the person acts and on the social, economic or behavioral obstacles that lead to the exclusion of those who are different.

The social model has not yet established itself in a systemic manner in legal experience, which still appears conditioned by conceptual and classificatory categories specific to medical science. However, its influence on the birth of a critical theory of law that opposes the anthropological model based on ableism cannot be denied.

In this regard, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), signed in New York in 2006, constitutes the most complete expression, on a regulatory level, of thinking oriented towards the model of social disability, linking the concept of disability to that of protection of human rights and encouraging the affirmation of key topics, such as awareness of one’s rights, non-discrimination, equal opportunities, inclusion and participation, destined to strongly influence legal practice.

The UN Convention has contributed to the spread of a new legal sensitivity, which conceives disabled people as subjects of law who must have equal opportunities to realize their talents and their rights.

It promotes awareness of the condition of the disabled person and their abilities, contributing on an educational level to the diffusion of a new culture of respect for the rights and dignity of the disabled person (art.8).

It encourages active participation, accessibility in all its aspects from an architectural point of view, accessibility of information, training of professionals on the issue, etc. (art.9). It draws the attention of States to the importance of universal design (of products and services that can be used by all people) and personal mobility with the greatest possible independence (art.20).

The Convention has certainly contributed to forging a new way of creating and interpreting the law, which must not be complicit in a process of exclusion and marginalization of the disabled person but have a proactive role aimed at contributing to improving their quality of life.

The hope is that its principles provide the interpreter and operator of the law with a broader understanding of the phenomenon of disability, positively influencing legal experience (understood in its theoretical aspects and practical profiles).

But let’s go back to the initial question regarding the obstacles that Bella Baxter would encounter in today’s society.

One could respond that she would have to face a myriad of cultural barriers even before material ones, that she would not be immune from the widespread tendency towards classification and cataloging which could limit and condition her choices.

All true, but perhaps today she could be just as free to live and experiment. Because she is finally changing the perception of all of us, tired of having to be and appear perfect, of having to fit into the norm.

Deep down we all want to be like Bella Baxter, to experience her freedom which cannot be imprisoned in a definition and which cannot (and must not) scare us.

The World Bank Treasury will host Girls Who Invest summer scholars on their investment management teams in addition to Treasury’s existing summer internship program. Founded in 2020, the internship program has hosted over 50 interns worldwide, representing 20 nationalities and a full gender balance.

Girls Who Invest provides tuition-free training in core finance and investment concepts to participating scholars. With training in investment management, the skills they bring to the World Bank Treasury will enrich the quality of the summer cohort.

“As we celebrate International Women’s Day, the World Bank is partnering to go farther together,” said Jorge Familiar, Vice President & Treasurer, World Bank. “As the largest investment manager in the development community, we are delighted to partner with Girls Who Invest to advance women in asset management roles and our status as the trusted partner for public asset managers.”

“We are thrilled to partner with The World Bank and to have Girls Who Invest Scholars join the esteemed Treasury Summer Internship Program. It’s especially meaningful to announce our partnership during Women’s History Month. The World Bank Treasury leadership is dedicated like us to advancing women in finance and investing and together we will make meaningful change for generations to come,” said Seema Hingorani, Founder and Chair of Girls Who Invest.

About the World Bank Treasury

The World Bank Treasury manages the finances of IBRD and IDA to enable all World Bank operations and lending. Treasury acts as a trusted advisor to our member countries to support financial stability and resilience. As a global asset management leader, Treasury prudently manages over $235 billion in assets including overseeing investment of the World Bank Group’s pension fund’s assets, the largest asset manager in the development community. With over 70 years of innovation in the capital markets, Treasury issues over $50 billion in bonds and processes over $7 trillion in transactions every year. Learn more at treasury.worldbank.org.

About Girls Who Invest

Girls Who Invest (GWI) is a non-profit organization dedicated to transforming the investment management industry by attracting and advancing women and non-binary investors, change-makers, and leaders. To date, more than 2,500 scholars have been trained in investment management by GWI in just eight years, over 70% of whom pursue full time careers in the industry. GWI does this through tuition-free education programs for first- and second-year college students. Beyond our programs, GWI provides career advisory services, community building, and support for our alumni at all stages in their careers, with a focus on long-term professional development, retention, and advancement. We believe, and evidence-based research shows, that advancing diverse investors brings unique and previously excluded perspectives to the industry and leads to higher performance. To learn more, visit GirlsWhoInvest.org.

This International Women’s Day, 8 March 2024, join the United Nations in celebrating under the theme Invest in women: Accelerate progress.

The world is facing many crises, ranging from geopolitical conflicts to soaring poverty levels and the escalating impacts of climate change. These challenges can only be addressed by solutions that empower women. By investing in women, we can spark change and speed the transition towards a healthier, safer, and more equal world for all.

If current trends continue, more than 342 million women and girls could be living extreme poverty by 2030. To ensure women’s needs and priorities are considered, governments must prioritize gender-responsive financing and increase public spending on essential services and social protection.

Policymakers must also value, recognize, and account for the vital contribution women make to economies worldwide through paid and unpaid care work. Women spend around three times more time on unpaid care work than men and if these activities were assigned a monetary value they would account for more than 40 per cent of GDP.

Investing in women and championing gender equality turbocharges a future where everyone in society can thrive, creating a world of boundless opportunity and empowerment for all.

This International Women’s Day, 8 March 2024, join the United Nations in celebrating under the theme Invest in women: Accelerate progress.

The world is facing many crises, ranging from geopolitical conflicts to soaring poverty levels and the escalating impacts of climate change. These challenges can only be addressed by solutions that empower women. By investing in women, we can spark change and speed the transition towards a healthier, safer, and more equal world for all.

If current trends continue, more than 342 million women and girls could be living extreme poverty by 2030. To ensure women’s needs and priorities are considered, governments must prioritize gender-responsive financing and increase public spending on essential services and social protection.

Policymakers must also value, recognize, and account for the vital contribution women make to economies worldwide through paid and unpaid care work. Women spend around three times more time on unpaid care work than men and if these activities were assigned a monetary value they would account for more than 40 per cent of GDP.

Investing in women and championing gender equality turbocharges a future where everyone in society can thrive, creating a world of boundless opportunity and empowerment for all.

Source: UN Women

This is particularly urgent when war and crisis are eroding the achievements of decades of investments in gender equality. From the Middle East to Haiti, Sudan, Myanmar, Ukraine, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, women pay the biggest price for conflicts that are not of their making. The need for peace has never been more urgent.

Climate change is accelerating persistent poverty gaps. As competition for scarce resources intensifies, livelihoods are threatened, societies become more polarized, and women bear an increasingly heavy burden:

• 1 in every 10 women in the world lives in extreme poverty.
• The number of women and girls living in conflict-affected areas doubled since 2017, now, more than 614 million women and girls live in conflict-affected areas. In conflict areas, women are 7.7 times more likely to live in extreme poverty.
• Climate change is set to leave 236 million more women and girls hungry by 2030, twice as many as men (131 million).
• At prime working age, only 61 per cent of women are in the labour force versus 90 per cent of men.

We cannot continue to miss out on the gender-equality dividend. More than 100 million women and girls could be lifted out of poverty if governments prioritized education and family planning, fair and equal wages, and expanded social benefits.

Almost 300 million jobs could be created by 2035 through investments in care services, such as provision of daycare and elderly care. And closing gender employment gaps could boost gross domestic product per capita by 20 per cent across all regions.

The current reality is far from this. Programmes dedicated to gender equality represent only 4 per cent of official development assistance. An additional USD 360 billion in developing countries is needed per year to achieve gender equality and women’s empowerment. This is less than one fifth of the USD 2.2 trillion spent globally on military expenditure in 2022, for example.

The areas needing investment are clear and understood. First and foremost there must be an investment in peace. Beyond this, the investments needed include: laws and policies that advance the rights of women and girls; transformation of social norms that pose barriers to gender equality; guaranteeing women’s access to land, property, health care, education, and decent work; and financing women’s groups networks at all levels.

UN Women is also calling on Member States at the Commission on the Status of Women, starting in New York on 11 March 2024, to back up their commitments on gender equality with resources. The world’s leaders have this opportunity to develop concrete and progressive agreed conclusions that reflect the crucial need for financing gender equality, women’s empowerment, and women´s organizations. They must seize it for the sake of equality, our planet, and the Sustainable Development Goals.

One of the key challenges in achieving gender equality by 2030 is an alarming lack of financing with a staggering USD 360 billion annual deficit in spending on gender-equality measures.

The time for change is now! Join us on 8 March 2024 for International Women’s Day as we rally behind the call to “Invest in women: Accelerate progress”. 

Take a stand and join the conversation with the #InvestInWomen hashtag. Here are five key areas that need our joint action to ensure women are not left behind:

Investing in women: A human rights issue

Time is running out. Gender equality remains the greatest human rights challenge. Investing in women is a human rights imperative and cornerstone for building inclusive societies. Progress for women benefits us all.

Ending poverty 

The COVID pandemic, geopolitical conflicts, climate disasters, and economic turmoil have pushed an extra 75 million people into severe poverty, since 2020. This could lead to more than 342 million women and girls living below the poverty line by 2030, making immediate action crucial.  

Implementing gender-responsive financing

Due to conflicts and rising fuel and food prices, recent estimates suggest that 75 per cent of countries will curb public spending by 2025. Austerity negatively impacts women and crowds out public spending on essential public services and social protection.

Shifting to a green economy and care society

The current economic system exacerbates poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation, disproportionately affecting women and marginalized groups. Advocates for alternative economic models propose a shift towards a green economy and care society that amplifies women’s voices.

Supporting feminist change-makers

Feminist organizations are leading efforts to tackle women’s poverty and inequality. However, they are running on empty, receiving a meagre 0.13 per cent of total official development assistance. 

Source: UN Women

Image: Deyanira Cordoba, one of many coffee-growing women of Tablón de Gómez, in the Nariño region of Colombia. As part of a UN Women project, she has learned about her economic rights, bodily autonomy and more. Photo: UN Women/Ryan Brown