10. recap - power struggles against equality

Political ideologies: building blocks

• A world-view: what the society looks like now (positive & negative)

• A desired future, a vision of the ‘good society’

• How political change can and should be brought about – how to get from ‘world-view’ to ‘good society

Liberalism, conservatism & socialism: building blocks

What ‘does’ an ideology

Provides criteria to organize societies and institutions

• political parties organize around ideologies

• but not all ideologies have associated political parties; some ideologies inform many parties (liberalism, patriarchy)

Provides belief system to individuals: informs preferences and actions

• Ideologies link thought and behaviour

• Deep beliefs, not facts (tension between beliefs & facts; misinformation; ‘post-truth’)

• Critique: indoctrinates people (tool of power)

contemporary ideologies

• patriarchy

• neoliberalism

• democracy

• populism

Patriarchy

Neoliberalism

Democracy

Populism (Gustin, Linders)

Populist radical right (PRR) & far-right in Europe & gender equality

Gender is trivotal

• trivial → non defining for PRR ideology

• Pivotel → a core social relation that is instrumentalised to center and emphasise PRR ideology

• all PRR parties differ in opinions on these topics (trivial) but they all engage with it or use it (pivotal)

context

• existing national culture determines the accompanying ideology and stance on gender equality

conservatism

• populism mixes with conservatism in different variations:

  • neo-traditionalist → nostalgic return to patriarchy

  • modern-traditionalist → advanced in terms of women’s rights as accepted, but still traditional understanding of gender roles

    • e.g., women are allowed in the workforce, but duty of care is still their burden

reduced to immigration, integration or islam

• gender equality as a weapon against the alleged ‘islamization’ of europe

• liberal equality between men and women is seen as a national value that is under threat against foreign influences

Power struggles

Opposition to gender equality

• “any activity in which a perspective opposing feminist politics and gender + equality policy is articulated in a way that can be expected to influence or is actually influencing politics or policymaking at any stage” (Verloo 2018) – opposition can happen at any stage, also without any effect

• there is first a group that fights for and then a move against

Anti-gender politics

• promotes a vision of society that is patriarchal, white, heteronormative and builds on the ideal of “traditional family”; attack and vilify the concept of “gender”; promote a “gender ideology” narrative

• works independently from organizations and movements that promote inequality; do not necessitize groups or organizations to move against

Power struggles: agonism vs antagonism

Agonism

• political adversaries disagree within a shared democratic framework

• e.g., disagreeing what (in)equality means, ethnic minority women disagreeing with white feminist movements, …

• = healthy democratic struggle

Antagonism

• hostile conflict between enemies who do not recognise each other’s legitimacy (cf. GL An Van Bavel)

• beyond the democratic framework

Discursive approach (Gustin)

A discurvise-theoretical approach explores the ways in which “gender is theorized as a discourse and a practice that is continuously contested and constructed in political debates.

Far-right trilogy

• nativism (racist & xenophobic)

• populism

• authoritarianism

Distinction between liberal racisms (cultural, e.g., islamophobia) and illiberal racism (biological, more extreme right). Within the liberal ideology there’s a cultural racism that can thrive.

Far-right accuses feminism of

1. being an ideology → feminism IS an ideology, but FR accuses it of brainwashing society with a gender ideology

2. feminism has gone too far → backlash against progress; but also backlash without progress: anti-gender campaigns where gender serves as a glue to bring thinkers and actors together

3. feminism being outdated → post-feminist society - depoliticisation (> < 1 & 2, which is politicisation)

Discursive approach: paradoxes (Gustin)

Paradoxes:

• Being sexist, racist and homophobic, yet being defenders of women’s & gay rights (e.g., Pim Fortuyn)

• paradox between the racialisation of patriarchy (e.g., Muslims are sexist and a danger to women) & anti-gender discourses

• Linders → PRR leaders can even be openly gay (e.g., Pim Fortuyn) and have a patriarchal discourse

Differences amongst far-right leaders (Linders)

• There are differences amongst far-right politicians, ending up in the same place

  • E.g., Appealing to ’the common man’ in different ways (see videos)

Paradox often returns in these PRR and their discursive approaches – but Gustin & Linders argue to discuss the coherence! The focus on paradoxes seems to overlook both the discursive coherence of far-right parties’ gender discourses, as well as their strategical dimension. By having different discourses, parties like Vlaams Belang are able to attract different audiences and take on internal diversity.

Discursive coherence and strategy

• Racialisation of patriarchy and homophobia = Femo/homoracism (rather than femo/homonationalism): discourse of Western ‘sexual exceptionalism’

  • Gustin argues to label these discourses as racism!

• Conservative party logic; consistently patriarchal/binary; supportive of hegemonic masculinity/sexuality power relations

• Articulation of liberal signifiers (freedom of speech, choice, gender equality, secularism) with reactionary politics

• Direct opposition: rejection; refer to gender ideology

• Indirect opposition: bending, self- victimization, de-politicization

  • 1) bending → the meaning of gender equality is bent toward issues and goals other than gender equality, such as migration and islamophobia

  • 2) victimization → ‘we cannot say anything anymore these days’ – oppressed men are the victim

  • 3) depoliticization → e.g., entire concept of trans is ignored, doesn’t exist, not a political topic, …

institutional approach (Berthet)

EP historically defender of equality

but, also…

• opposition to gender equality (e.g., Istanbul convention)

• tensions between and within PGs, debates on human rights and gender issues, …

• result → arena allowing the development of an alternative (far right, anti gender) political project

anti-gender campaigns and activism

• promotion of authoritarianism against minority rights

  • This is not only about sexual / gender rights, but about authoritarianism vs democracy & gender is the battlefield

• Depict advocates of women and minority rights as threats to traditional values and national identity & justifying violence against them

• Multiple actors: politicians, parliamentarians, civil society actors, members of the clergy and intellectuals, both at national and transnational level

  • Multiple actors are linked

tactics

• lobbying, advocacy, mobilisation and street protests, litigation, new

  policies and persecution of feminist and LGBTIQ+ activist, scholars and advocates

• EU ‘uncivil’ society actors’ strategies: use bullying strategies, misinformation tactics with an anti-right agenda and with the aim to polarize democratic political debate

Feminist institutional responses (Berthet)

knowledge

• consistent discourse of EU democracy & values

• calling out misinformation and raising awareness

coalition building

• within institutions and outside acotrs

• within and across PGs

• cross-generational

making and using rules

• setting the agenda

• blue cards → polite way to comment on a speech and receive a response - confront racism and hate speech

• rules of procedure → request assessments of hate speech from plenary chair

everyday pragmatic engagement

• disengagement with FR politicians

• but also opposite → engagement within a democratic framework - forcing anti-democratic actors to behave in a democratic way

Academic responses (Mügge)

Interdisciplinary & transdisciplinary co-creation

• Academics, activists, performative artists

Building democratic & inclusive masculinity alternatives

• >< anti-democratic, violent masculinities

Building evidence-based interventions

• Barber training, focus on sports clubs, bystander training for boys, …