The article analyses party documents and rhetoric from Kotleba’s People’s Party of Our Slovakia (ĽSNS) and demonstrates that it has a culturally conservative, instrumental and paternalist-populist attitude to gender issues. The thematic analysis indicates that the ĽSNS not only seeks to promote traditional gender roles and the exclusion of women from public space but also uses quasi-feminist arguments. These, for instance, call on women to engage more in public life but only in support of its patriarchal agenda. Our findings show (...) that gender related issues feature only peripherally in ĽSNS rhetoric, however they are used strategically as a theme that cuts across the party ideology, forming not its core but being purposely used in relation to the party’s main priorities. ĽSNS uses gender related themes as part of its political arsenal for (1) increasing the party’s support amongst women and (2) seeking to involve more women in the party’s activities to increase its acceptability among voters. (shrink)

Radical right political parties are usually heavily male-dominated; accordingly, previous research has concentrated on the perspective of men. The present study aims to enhance the understanding of the worldview of women within radical right parties. Taking a critical discursive psychological approach, the study looks at how female populist radical right politicians in Sweden and Finland discursively negotiate the tension between the Nordic societal norm of gender equality, on the one hand, and the patriarchal ideology of populist radical right parties, on (...) the other. The analysis suggests that the female populist radical right politicians’ discourse is indeed highly ambivalent. The discursive tension between gender equality and a patriarchal politics is heavily intertwined with two further tensions: first, that of a societal norm against prejudice versus a politics based on xenophobia; and second, that of a culture that cherishes individualism versus a political pressure to homogenize the political or cultural ‘Other’. The study compares the discourse of female populist radical right politicians in the two country contexts. Moreover, it discusses the differences and similarities between this discourse, on the one hand, and that of male populist radical right politicians, on the other. Finally, it analyses the gendered and racialized categorizations accomplished by the discursive patterns, and elaborates on their societal implications. (shrink)