Elīna Rancāne

This article argues that the Latvian controversy surrounding the Istanbul Convention cannot be understood merely as a disagreement over women’s rights, domestic violence policy, or the correct translation of the English term “gender.” Rather, it reveals a broader semiotic conflict over the legal meaning of gender itself. In Latvian legal and political discourse, the term dzimums carries both biological and social meanings, while dzimte has emerged as a marked and contested attempt to render the sociological dimension of gender visible. This linguistic ambiguity has allowed “gender” to become detached from its treaty-specific function – explaining socially constructed roles that sustain violence against women – and re-signified as a symbol of ideological threat, moral disorder, and perceived foreign imposition. Through a qualitative legal-semiotic analysis, the article traces how “gender” was translated, contested, and re-signified in Latvian law and public debate.

This paper engages in a comprehensive analysis of the historical processes leading to the destruction of the Original Nations of Belarus and Latvia. The research is structured in three sections, with the first outlining the tribal roots common to both Latvian and Belarusian nations, serving as a foundation for subsequent analyses. The second section constitutes the core of the research, employing an Original Nation approach to dissect the impact of historic occupations in the five key waves—religious conversion, invasions of the Mongol-Tatar Yoke that led to administrative integration into states, a language push under the Russian Empire, identity erasure during Sovietization, and lastly, the restoration of independence in both countries. The last section surveys the modern states of Belarus and Latvia, emphasising their endeavours to revive their Original Nations, as both nations share the burden of recovering lost national elements, resisting cultural repression, and building a robust national identity.