Despite their Männerparteien reputation, populist radical right (PRR) parties have recently expanded their agendas to include women’s interests. When do they embrace these interests, and what shapes their stance? We propose a theory of strategic window dressing: electorally struggling PRR parties, seeking to gain voters, showcase women’s interests superficially without shifting core gender ideologies. Using original text analysis of PRR party manifestos across 30 European countries (1984–2022), we find that parties emphasize gender-related rights when electorally vulnerable—but avoid adopting more gender-egalitarian positions. Instead, they promote risk-averse, femonationalist stances. While having a woman leader increases attention to gender-based violence, a higher share of women MPs has no impact on either the salience of or position on women’s interests. These findings suggest that the PRR’s nod to women’s interests is largely a tactical move, not a genuine commitment to substantive representation of women’s interests.
AardalB.BerghJ. (2018). The 2017 Norwegian election. West European Politics, 41(5), 1208–1216.
2.
Abou-ChadiT. (2016). Niche party success and mainstream party policy shifts - How green and radical right parties differ in their impact. British Journal of Political Science, 46(2), 417–436. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123414000155
3.
Abou-ChadiT.BreyerM.GesslerT. (2021). The (Re)Politicisation of gender in Western Europe. European Journal of Politics and Gender, 4(2), 311–314. https://doi.org/10.1332/251510821x16177312096679
4.
Abou-ChadiT.KrauseW. (2020). The causal effect of radical right success on mainstream parties’ policy positions: A regression discontinuity approach. British Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 829–847. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123418000029
5.
AckerlyB. A.TrueJ. (2019). Doing feminist research in political and social science. Bloomsbury Publishing.
6.
AkkermanT. (2015). Gender and the radical right in Western Europe: A comparative analysis of policy agendas. Patterns of Prejudice, 49(1–2), 37–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322x.2015.1023655
7.
AkkermanT.HagelundA. (2007). Women and children first!' anti-immigration parties and gender in Norway and the Netherlands. Patterns of Prejudice, 41(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313220701265569
8.
BaldezL. (2011). The UN Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): A New Way to Measure Women’s Interests. Politics & Gender, 7(3), 419–423.
9.
BaleT.Green-PedersenC.KrouwelA.LutherK. R.SitterN. (2010). If you can’t beat them, join them? Explaining social democratic responses to the challenge from the populist radical right in Western Europe. Political Studies, 58(3), 410–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2009.00783.x
10.
BarnesT. D.CasseseE. C. (2017). American party women: A look at the gender gap within parties. Political Research Quarterly, 70(1), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912916675738
11.
BeckwithK. (2011). Interests, issues, and preferences: ‘women's interests’ and epiphenomena of activism. Politics and Gender, 7(3), 424–429. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x11000195
12.
BeckwithK. (2014). Plotting the path from one to the other: Women’s interests and political representation. In Taylor-RobinsonM.Escobar-LemmonM. (Eds.), Representation: The case of women’s interests (pp. 19–40): Oxford University Press.
13.
Ben-ShitritL.Elad-StrengerJ.Hirsch-HoeflerS. (2022). Pinkwashing’ the radical right: Gender and the mainstreaming of radical right policies and actions. European Journal of Political Research, 61(1), 86–110.
14.
BergmanM.FlattH. (2020). Issue diversification: Which niche parties can succeed by broadening their agenda?Political Studies, 68(3), 710–730. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321719865538
15.
BergqvistC.BjarnegårdE.ZetterbergP. (2018). The gendered leeway: Male privilege, internal and external mandates, and gender-equality policy change. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 6(4), 576–592.
16.
BetzH.-G.MeretS. (2009). Revisiting Lepanto: The political mobilization against Islam in contemporary Western Europe. Patterns of Prejudice, 43(3-4), 313–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313220903109235
17.
BjarnegårdE.ZetterbergP. (2022). How autocrats weaponize women’s rights. Journal of Democracy, 33(2), 60–75.
18.
BrownN. E. (2014). Sisters in the statehouse: Black women and legislative decision making. Oxford University Press.
19.
BrumbaughS. M.SanchezL. A.NockS. L.WrightJ. D. (2008). Attitudes toward gay marriage in states undergoing marriage law transformation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(2), 345–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00486.x
20.
BuštíkováL. (2014). Revenge of the radical right. Comparative Political Studies, 47(12), 1738–1765.
21.
CampbellR.ChildsS. (2015). All aboard the pink battle bus? Women voters, women’s issues, candidates and party leaders. Parliamentary Affairs, 68(1), 206–223. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsv036
22.
CampbellR.ChildsS.LovenduskiJ. (2010). Do women need women representatives?British Journal of Political Science, 40(10), 171–194. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123409990408
23.
CampbellR.ErzeelS. (2018). Exploring gender differences in support for rightist parties: The role of party and gender ideology. Politics and Gender, 14(1), 80–105. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x17000599
24.
CarminesE. G.StimsonJ. A. (1989). Issue evolution: Race and the transformation of American politics. Princeton University Press.
25.
CarminesE. G.StimsonJ. A. (1993). On the evolution of political issues. In RikerW. H. (Ed.), Agenda formation (pp. 151–168). University of Michigan Press.
26.
CasseseE. C.HolmanM. R. (2019). Playing the woman card: Ambivalent sexism in the 2016 U.S. presidential race. Political Psychology, 40(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12492
CelisK.ChildsS. (2014). Introduction: The ‘Puzzle’ of gender, conservatism and representation. In CelisK.ChildsS. (Eds.), Gender, conservatism and political representation (pp. pp1–20). ECPR Press.
29.
CelisK.ChildsS. (2020). Feminist democratic representation. Oxford University Press.
30.
CelisK.ChildsS.KantolaJ.KrookM. L. (2014). Constituting women’s interests through representative claims. Politics and Gender, 10(2), 149–174. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x14000026
31.
ChueriJ.DamerowA. (2023). Closing the gap: How descriptive and substantive representation affect women’s vote for populist radical right parties. West European Politics, 46(5), 928–946. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2022.2113219
32.
ClaytonA.JosefssonC.MattesR.MozaffarS. (2019). In whose interest? Gender and mass-elite priority congruence in Sub-Saharan Africa. Comparative Political Studies, 52(1), 69–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018758767
33.
ClaytonA.ZetterbergP. (2018). Quota shocks: Electoral gender quotas and government spending priorities worldwide. The Journal of Politics, 80(3), 916–932. https://doi.org/10.1086/697251
34.
ClaytonA.ZetterbergP. (2021). Gender and party discipline: Evidence from Africa’s emerging party systems. American Political Science Review, 115(3), 869–884. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055421000368
35.
CofféH. (2019). Gender, gendered personality traits and radical right populist voting. Politics, 39(2), 170–185.
36.
CofféH.FraileM.AlexanderA.Fortin-RittbergerJ.BanducciS. (2023). Masculinity, sexism and populist radical right support. Frontiers in Political Science, 5, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.1038659
37.
ConoverP. J. (1988). Feminists and the gender gap. The Journal of Politics, 50(4), 985–1010. https://doi.org/10.2307/2131388
38.
DancygierR. (2020). Another Progressive’s Dilemma: Immigration, the Radical Right & Threats to Gender Equality. Daedalus, 149(1), 56–71.
39.
De GiorgiE.CavalieriA.FeoF. (2023). From opposition leader to prime minister: Giorgia Meloni and women's issues in the Italian radical right. Politics and Governance, 11(1), 108–118. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i1.6042
40.
De KosterW.AchterbergP.Van der WaalJ.Van BohemenS.KemmersR. (2014). Progressiveness and the new right: The electoral relevance of culturally progressive values in the Netherlands. West European Politics, 37(3), 584–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2013.814963
41.
De SioL.WeberT. (2014). Issue yield: A model of party strategy in multidimensional space. American Political Science Review, 108(4), 870–885. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055414000379
42.
De VriesE.SchoonveldeM.SchumacherG. (2018). No longer lost in translation: Evidence that Google translate works for comparative bag-of-words text applications. Political Analysis, 26(4), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.26
43.
DhoestA. (2020). LGBTs in, Muslims out: Homonationalist discourses and counterdiscourses in the Flemish press. International Journal of Communication, 14, 155–175.
44.
DinglerS. C.KroeberC.Fortin-RittbergerJ. (2018). Do parliaments underrepresent women's policy preferences? Exploring gender equality in policy congruence in 21 European democracies. Journal of European Public Policy, 26(2), 302–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2017.1423104
45.
DolanK. (1998). Voting for women in the “Year of the Woman”. American Journal of Political Science, 42(1), 272–293. https://doi.org/10.2307/2991756
46.
DonàA. (2021). Radical right populism and the backlash against gender equality: The case of the Lega (Nord). Contemporary Italian Politics, 13(3), 296–313.
47.
DownsA. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. Harper Collins.
48.
EskandariV.BanfiE. (2017). Institutionalising Islamophobia in Switzerland: The burqa and minaret bans. Islamophobia Studies Journal, 4(1), 53–71.
49.
Espírito-SantoA.FreireA.Serra-SilvaS. (2020). Does women’s descriptive representation matter for policy preferences? The role of political parties. Party Politics, 26(2), 227–237.
FieldB. (2021). Ministers, gender and political appointments. Government and Opposition, 56(4), 722–743. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2020.10
54.
FosterR.KirkeX. (2023). Straighten up and fly right: Radical right attempts to appeal to the British LGBTQ+ community. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 25(2), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481211069346
55.
GelmanA.HillJ. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press.
56.
GidengilE.HennigarM.BlaisA.NevitteN. (2005). Explaining the gender gap in support for the new right. The case of Canada. Comparative Political Studies, 38(10), 1171–1195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414005279320
GornickJ. C.MeyersM. K. (2003). Families that work: Policies for reconciling parenthood and employment. Russell Sage Foundation.
59.
GreeneZ. (2016). Competing on the issues: How experience in government and economic conditions influence the scope of parties’ policy messages. Party Politics, 22(6), 809–822. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068814567026
60.
GreeneZ.O’BrienD. Z. (2016). Diverse parties, diverse agendas? Female politicians and the parliamentary party's role in platform formation. European Journal of Political Research, 55(3), 435–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12141
61.
HanK. J. (2015). The impact of radical right-wing parties on the positions of mainstream parties regarding multiculturalism. West European Politics, 38(3), 557–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2014.981448
62.
HarteveldE.DahlbergS.KokkonenA.Van Der BrugW. (2019). Gender differences in vote choice: Social cues and social harmony as heuristics. British Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 1141–1161. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123417000138
63.
HarteveldE.IvarsflatenE. (2018). Why women avoid the radical right: Internalized norms and party reputations. British Journal of Political Science, 48(2), 369–384. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123415000745
64.
HarteveldE.Van Der BrugW.DahlbergS.KokkonenA. (2015). The gender gap in radical-right voting: Examining the demand side in Western and eastern Europe. Patterns of Prejudice, 49(1-2), 103–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322x.2015.1024399
65.
HerekG. M. (2002). Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(1), 40–66. https://doi.org/10.1086/338409
66.
HoboltS.De VriesC. E. (2015). Issue entrepreneurship and multiparty competition. Comparative Political Studies, 48(9), 1159–1185. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414015575030
67.
HöhmannD.MaryN. (2022). Male MPs, electoral vulnerability and the substantive representation of women's interests. European Journal of Political Research, 61(3), 762–782.
68.
ImmerzeelT.CofféH.van der LippeT. (2015). Explaining the gender gap in radical right voting: A cross-national investigation in 12 Western-European countries. Comparative European Politics, 13(2), 263–286. https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2013.20
69.
IvarsflatenE. (2008). What unites right-wing populists in Western Europe? Re-examining grievance mobilization models in seven successful cases. Comparative Political Studies, 41(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414006294168
70.
IversenT.RosenbluthF. (2010). Women, work, and politics. Yale University Press.
71.
JaumotteF. (2003). Female labour force participation: Past trends and main determinants in OECD countries. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2344556 (accessed 29 January 2024).
72.
JollyS.BakkerR.HoogheL.MarksG.PolkS.RovnyJ.SteenbergenM.VachudovaM. A. (2022). Chapel Hill expert survey trend file, 1999–2019. Electoral Studies, 75, 1–8.
73.
JonesK. L.NoorbaloochiS.JostJ. T.BonneauR.NaglerJ.TuckerJ. A. (2018). Liberal and conservative values: What we can learn from congressional tweets. Political Psychology, 39(2), 423–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12415
KantolaJ.LombardoE. (2019). Populism and feminist politics: The cases of Finland and Spain. European Journal of Political Research, 58(4), 1108–1128. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12333
76.
KaufmannK. M. (2002). Culture wars, secular realignment, and the gender gap in party identification. Political Behavior, 24(3), 283–307. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1021824624892
77.
KingG.TomzM.WittenbergJ. (2000). Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669316
78.
KittilsonM. C. (2008). Representing women: The adoption of family leave policies in comparative perspective. The Journal of Politics, 70(2), 323–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/s002238160808033x
KläyY.EichenbergerR.PortmannM.StadelmannD. (2025). Substantive representation of women: Empirical evidence. British Journal of Political Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123424000528
81.
KroeberC. (2022). How parties led by a woman redefine their positions: Empirical evidence for women's green, alternative and libertarian agenda. European Journal of Political Research, 61(1), 175–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12449
82.
LancasterC. (2020). Not so radical after all: Ideological diversity among radical right supporters and its implications. Political Studies, 68(3), 600–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321719870468
83.
LawallK. (N. D.). Gender immigration messages: How women’s rights are used to normalize anti-immigration views. https://osf.io/4jywc/ (accessed 29 January 2024).
84.
LehmannP.FranzmannS.Al-GaddooaD.IvanuschC.RegelS.RiethmüllerF.VolkensA.WeßelsB.ZehnterL. (2024). The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). (Version 2024a). Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB) / Göttingen: Institut für Demokratieforschung (IfDem). https://doi.org/10.25522/manifesto.mpds.2024a (accessed 29 January 2024).
85.
LenzG. S.SahnA. (2021). Achieving statistical significance with control variables and without transparency. Political Analysis, 29(3), 356–369. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2020.31
86.
LindersN.DudinkS.SpieringsN. (2023). Masculinity and sexuality in populist radical right leadership. Politics and Gender, 19(3), 653–674. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x22000265
87.
LoddersV.WeldonS. (2019). Why do women vote radical right? Benevolent sexism, representation and inclusion in four countries. Representation, 55(4), 457–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2019.1652202
88.
LucasC.NielsenR. A.RobertsM. E.StewartB. M.StorerA.TingleyD. (2015). Computer-assisted text analysis for comparative politics. Political Analysis, 23(2), 254–277. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpu019
89.
MansbridgeJ. (1999). Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women?The Journal of Politics, 61(3), 628–657. https://doi.org/10.2307/2647821
MayerN. (2013). From Jean- Marie to Marine Le Pen: Electoral change on the far right. Parliamentary Affairs, 66(1), 160–178. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gss071
92.
MayerN. (2015). The closing of the radical right gender gap in France?French Politics, 13(4), 391–414. https://doi.org/10.1057/fp.2015.18
93.
MeguidB. M. (2008). Party competition between unequals. Cambridge University Press.
94.
MeguidB. M. (2023). Adaptation or inflexibility? Niche party responsiveness to policy competition, with evidence from regionalist parties. European Journal of Political Research, 62(2), 355–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12540
95.
MeretS. (2015). Charismatic female leadership and gender: Pia Kjærsgaard and the Danish people's party. Patterns of Prejudice, 49(1-2), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322x.2015.1023657
96.
MessnerM. A. (2007). The masculinity of the governator: Muscle and compassion in American politics. Gender & Society, 21(4), 461–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243207303166
97.
MeyerT.WagnerM. (2013). Mainstream or niche? vote-Seeking incentives and the programmatic strategies of political parties. Comparative Political Studies, 46(10), 1246–1272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414013489080
98.
MondonA.WinterA. (2019). Mapping and mainstreaming Islamophobia: Between the illiberal and liberal. In ZempiI.AwanI. (Eds.), The routledge international handbook of Islamophobia (pp. 58–70). Routledge.
99.
MorganK. J. (2013). Path shifting of the welfare state: Electoral competition and the expansion of work-family policies in Western Europe. World Politics, 65(1), 73–115. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0043887112000251
100.
MossP.DevenF. (2019). Leave policies in Europe: Current policies, future directions. International Journal of Sociology & Social Policy, 40(5/6), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijssp-04-2019-0063
101.
MuddeC. (2007). Populist radical right parties in Europe. Cambridge University Press.
102.
MurrayR.SénacR. (2014). Mapping ‘feminist’ demands across the French political spectrum. In CelisK.ChildsS. (Eds.), Gender, conservatism and political representation (pp. 231–250). ECPR Press.
103.
NaurinE. (2014). Is a promise a promise? Election pledge fulfilment in comparative perspective using Sweden as an example. West European Politics, 37(5), 1046–1064. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2013.863518
104.
NayakM. B.ByrneC. A.MartinM. K.AbrahamA. G. (2003). Attitudes toward violence against women: A cross-nation study. Sex Roles, 49(7/8), 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025108103617
105.
NohY.GrewalS.KilavuzM. T. (2024). Regime support and gender quotas in autocracies. American political science review, 118(2), 706–723.
106.
NorrisP. (2005). Radical right: Voters and parties in the electoral market. Cambridge University Press.
107.
NorrisP.InglehartR. (2019). Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit and authoritarian populism. Cambridge University Press.
108.
O'BrienD. Z. (2012). When women matter: The relationship between women's presence and policy representation in Western European states. All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs), 973. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/973 (accessed 29 January 2024).
109.
O'BrienD. Z. (2019). Female leaders and citizens' perceptions of political parties. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion, and Parties, 29(4), 465–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2019.1669612
110.
O’BrienD. Z. (2021). Women party leaders. In de GeusR.TolleyE.Goodyear-GrantE.LoewenP. J. (Eds.), Women, power, and political representation: Canadian and comparative perspectives (pp. 79–88). University of Toronto Press.
111.
OffG. (2023). Gender equality salience, backlash and radical right voting in the gender-equal context of Sweden. West European Politics, 46(3), 451–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2022.2084986
112.
OsborneD.HuangY.OverallN. C.SuttonR. M.PettersonA.DouglasK. M.DaviesP. G.SibleyC. G. (2022). Abortion attitudes: An overview of demographic and ideological differences. Political Psychology, 43(S1), 29–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12803
113.
OshriO.HarsgorL.Itzkovitch-MalkaR.TuttnauerO. (2023). Risk aversion and the gender gap in the vote for populist radical right parties. American Journal of Political Science, 67(3), 701–717. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12696
114.
PaolinoP. (1995). Group-salient issues and group representation: Support for women candidates in the 1992 senate elections. American Journal of Political Science, 39(2), 294–313. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111614
115.
PatelC. J.JohnsL. (2009). Gender role attitudes and attitudes to abortion: Are there gender differences?The Social Science Journal, 46(3), 493–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2009.02.006
116.
PhillipsA. (1995). The politics of presence. Oxford University Press.
117.
PlutzerE.ZippJ. (1996). Identity politics, partisanship, and voting for women candidates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(1), 30–57.
118.
PorzyckiV.OshriO.ShenhavS. R. (2025). What you see is not what you get: The incorporation of women in radical right parties. European Union Politics, 26(3), 477–500.
119.
PowellB.BolzendahlC.GeistC.SteelmanL. C. (2010). Counted out: Same-sex relations and Americans' definitions of family. Russell Sage Foundation.
120.
PuarJ. K. (2018). Terrorist assemblages: Homonationalism in queer times. Duke University Press.
121.
RashkovaE. R. (2021). Gender politics and radical right parties: An examination of women’s substantive representation in Slovakia. East European Politics & Societies: and Cultures, 35(1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325419897993
122.
RashkovaE.ZankinaE. (2017). Are (populist) radical right parties Männerparteien? Evidence from Bulgaria. West European Politics, 40(4), 848–868.
123.
RatliffK. A.RedfordL.ConwayJ.SmithC. T. (2019). Engendering support: Hostile sexism predicts voting for Donald trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(4), 578–593. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217741203
124.
ReingoldB.HaynieK. L. (2014). Representing women's interests and intersections of gender, race, and ethnicity in US state legislatures. In Escobar-LemmonM. C.Taylor-RobinsonM. M. (Eds.), Representation (pp. 183–204). Oxford University Press.
125.
ReingoldB.SwersM. (2011). An endogenous approach to Women's interests: When interests are interesting in and of themselves. Politics and Gender, 7(3), 429–435. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x11000201
126.
Reyes-HousholderC. (2017). Pro-women change and executive power in Latin America. APSA Comparative Politics Newsletter, 27(1), 64–68.
127.
RovnyJ. (2013). Where do radical right parties stand? Position blurring in multidimensional competition. European Political Science Review, 5(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755773911000282
128.
RovnyJ.PolkJ. (2020). Still blurry? Economic salience, position and voting for radical right parties in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 59(2), 248–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12356
129.
SchaffnerB. F.MacWilliamsM.NtetaT. (2018). Understanding white polarization in the 2016 vote for president: The sobering role of racism and sexism. Political Science Quarterly, 133(1), 9–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/polq.12737
130.
SchreiberR. (2002). Injecting a woman's voice: Conservative women's organizations, gender consciousness, and the expression of women's policy preferences. Sex Roles, 47(7-8), 331–342. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1021479030885
Schwindt‐BayerL. A. (2006). Still supermadres? Gender and the policy priorities of Latin American legislators. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00202.x
ScrinziF. (2017). Gender and women in the Front National discourse and policy: from ‘mothers of the nation’ to ‘working mothers’?New Formations, 91(91), 87–101.
135.
SiimB.SkjeieH. (2008). Tracks, intersections and dead ends multicultural challenges to state feminism in Denmark and Norway. Ethnicities, 8(3), 322–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796808092446
SnipesA.MuddeC. (2020). ‘France’s (kinder, gentler) extremist’: Marine Le Pen, intersectionality and media framing of female populist radical right leaders. Politics and Gender, 16(2), 438–470. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1743923x19000370
138.
SpieringsN. (2020). Why gender and sexuality are both trivial and pivotal in populist radical right politics. In DietzeG.RothJ. (Eds.), Right-wing populism and gender: European perspectives and beyond (pp. 41–58). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
139.
SpieringsN. (2021). Homonationalism and voting for the populist radical right: Addressing unanswered questions by zooming in on the Dutch case. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 33(1-2), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edaa005
SpoonJ.-J.WilliamsC. (2021). It’s the economy stupid: When new politics parties take on old politics issues. West European Politics, 44(4), 802–824. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2020.1776032
142.
SpoonJ.-J.WilliamsC. J. (2023). Environmental chauvinism? Explaining issue expansion among non-mainstream parties. Party Politics, 29(6), 1077–1087. https://doi.org/10.1177/13540688221117262
143.
SwimJ. K.AikinK. J.HallW. S.HunterB. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(2), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.68.2.199
144.
TeeleD. (2018a). Forging the franchise: The political origins of the women’s vote. Princeton University Press.
145.
TeeleD. (2018b). How the west was won: Competition, mobilization, and women’s enfranchisement in the United States. The Journal of Politics, 80(2), 442–461.
146.
ThériaultR.Ben-ShacharM. S.PatilI.LüdeckeD.WiernikB. M.MakowskiD. (2024). Check your outliers! an introduction to identifying statistical outliers in R with easystats. Behavior Research Methods, 56, 4162–4172.
147.
ThomsonR.RoyedT.NaurinE.ArtésJ.CostelloR.Ennser‐JedenastikL.FergusonM.KostadinovaP.MouryC.PétryF.PraprotnikK. (2017). The fulfillment of parties’ election pledges: A comparative study on the impact of power sharing. American Journal of Political Science, 61(3), 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12313
148.
TownsA.KarlssonE.EyreJ. (2014). The equality conundrum. Gender and nation in the ideology of the Sweden Democrats. Party Politics, 20(2), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068813520272
149.
Turnbull-DugarteS. J.López OrtegaA. (2024). Instrumentally inclusive: The political psychology of homonationalism. American Political Science Review, 118(3), 1360–1378. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055423000849
150.
WagnerM.MeyerT. (2014). Which issues do parties emphasise? Salience strategies and party organisation in multiparty systems. West European Politics, 37(5), 1019–1045. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2014.911483
151.
WagnerM.MeyerT. (2017). The radical right as niche parties? The ideological landscape of party systems in Western Europe, 1980-2014. Political Studies, 65(1_suppl), 84–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321716639065
152.
WängnerudL. (2000). Testing the politics of presence: Women’s representation in the Swedish Riksdag. Scandinavian Political Studies, 23(1), 67–91.
153.
WängnerudL. (2009). Women in parliaments: Descriptive and substantive representation. Annual Review of Political Science, 12, 51–69.
154.
WeeksA. C. (2022). Making gender salient: From gender quota laws to policy. Cambridge University Press.
155.
WeeksA. C. (2019). Quotas and party priorities: Direct and indirect effects of quota laws. Political Research Quarterly, 72(4), 849–862. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912918809493
156.
WeeksA. C.CaravantesP.Espírito-SantoA.LombardoE.StratigakiM.GulS. (2024). When is gender on party agendas? Manifestos and (De-) democratisation in Greece, Portugal, and Spain. South European Society & Politics. Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2024.2412746
157.
WeeksA. C.MeguidB. M.CofféH.KittilsonM. C. (2025). Replication data for: Strategic inclusion without transformation: How populist radical right parties engage with women’s interests. Harvard Dataverse, V1. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/SZK97T
158.
WeeksA. C.MeguidB. M.KittilsonM. C.CofféH. (2023). When do männerparteien elect women? Radical right populist parties and strategic descriptive representation. American Political Science Review, 117(2), 421–438. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055422000107
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
