At first glance, everything looks quite simple if passages in the Irish constitution that are perceived as sexist are to be changed this Friday. Article 41 formulates, among other things, the definition of the family and the role of women; It says, for example, that the state is committed to “protecting the institution of marriage on which the family is founded.” Or: “The state recognizes that women, through their life at home, are a support to the state, without which the common good cannot be achieved.” And further: “The state should therefore ensure that mothers are not forced by economic hardship to work while neglecting their domestic duties.”
In other words: In its constitution, the state regulates that it is okay for mothers to only take care of the home and children – in a wording that sounds as if the state expects exactly that from them. The constitution was passed in 1937, the same year that divorce was banned in Ireland and two years after contraception was made a criminal offense.
The government wants to change places in Article 41
Even in strictly Catholic Ireland, society in 2024 has long since arrived at a different reality. 70 percent of Irish women work outside the family and 40 percent of children were born without prior marriage. The Irish government would therefore like to change the relevant passages in Article 41 by referendum. Around 3.5 million eligible voters can vote this Friday. The only problem is that at second glance everything is more complicated.
In the past few weeks, all sorts of women’s rights activists and politicians in Ireland have spoken out, and hardly anyone doubted that a referendum on the question of whether these two passages should be deleted without replacement would have passed without any problems. The Irish Government However, instead suggests alternativeswhich has been debated ever since.
The passage dealing with the connection between marriage and family should be supplemented with the addition of “ongoing relationships”; the two sentences in which the “domestic duties of women” are discussed should be deleted. Instead, it should now say: “The state recognizes that the care of family members for each other, due to the bonds that exist between them, is a support of society, without which the common good cannot be achieved, and strives to promote this care.” In Irish media the alternatives are described as “genderless word salad”.
The language is “bizarre” and “insulting,” says a politics professor
The language used so far in the constitution is of course “bizarre” and “offensive,” Theresa Reidy, Irish politics professor, told the magazine Politico. At the same time, however, this has no impact on the way Irish society has developed; the passages have never been used in a court of law or exploited politically, “regardless of whether on the liberal or conservative side.” But that is exactly what opponents of the referendum fear: that the new text could lead to difficulties that did not exist before.
One of the spokesmen of the “Vote No” movement is former justice minister Michael McDowell, who warns that the term “ongoing relationship” could lead to “chaos in the family courts” if ex-girlfriends demand rights that have so far only been granted with the marriage, including citizenship, tax benefits or inheritance rights. Other opponents worry that mothers who consciously want to stay at home to care for their families will have a harder time in the future, and for others the changes don’t go far enough.
Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said shortly before the polls opened that he recognized the arguments against it. But a no would also mean that the old, sexist formulation would be reinforced, “and that would be a step backwards.” The results are expected on Saturday afternoon.