1 Introduction

This chapter aims to contribute with empirical evidence to the academic debate around the emergence of VOX, a new radical right-wing party, especially with regard to issues such as gender equality and immigration. The contribution of the present research to the academic literature lies in its systematic analysis of the discourse of this political force, so recently incorporated into the Spanish party system, on migration and gender equality. From the framework of gender and migration studies in Spain, this chapter seeks to establish an academic arena at the European level that identifies the intersection that exists between the anti-immigration and anti-gender equality stances of radical right-wing political forces. A case study into VOX in Spain, will permit a comparison between this political force with other similar ones in Europe.

This chapter’s contribution to the book focuses on the study of the discourse of VOX, a Spanish political force of the radical right. This political party and its discourse can serve to illustrate the exclusionary mobilization of certain parties to undermine the rights acquired in terms of gender equality by women, the rights of recognition of sexual diversity, and finally, it illustrates the positions against the presence of immigrants and questions the social rights that this group receives. Specifically, in VOX’s positions we can find a use of the normative construction of gender, family and sexuality that is strongly conservative. This nativist vision of the family and gender relations is used to draw borders against migrants, especially altering Muslim immigrants. VOX, like other forces of the European radical right, uses premises that reinforce the mechanism of intersectional exclusion against migrants’ and women’s rights. At the same time, these forces seek to maintain subaltern positions for women and migrants. The theoretical approach of situated intersectionality and borders, specifically intersectional bordering (Cassidy, Yuval-Davis and Wenyss, 2018), applied to the analysis of VOX’s political discourse, allows us to scrutinize how different social stratifications—such as gender and nationality—are transferred to political discourse, loaded with messages of exclusion towards these groups, and of inclusion towards men, Spaniards, Catholics, and traditional families. Finally, it should be noted that the chapter is located at the section on “Bordering across political discourses and mobilizations” where it analyses how political parties develop exclusionary discourses that link gender, sexuality and family constructions to migration.

VOX is a radical right-wing party with the following characteristics: a strong nationalist ideology, a liberal economic discourse, authoritarian conservatism, opposition to what they call “gender ideology” and the rights of LGBTQI+ communities, and finally, a policy of nativism that places them in direct opposition to immigration (Ferreira, 2019; Turnbull-Duarte et al., 2020). VOX was created in 2013 by former members of the Popular Party, the main conservative party in Spain (Gil Flores, 2019; Mendes & Dennison, 2021). This party remained without parliamentary political representation until the regional elections in Andalusia in 2018, and their electoral success was confirmed in the 2019 general elections (Marcos-Marne et al., 2021; Garrido Rubia et al., 2022).

The political context of the birth of VOX is related to two important political processes. The first is the triumph of a motion of censure that brought about a change in the state government from conservative hands to a left-wing government, led by the Socialist Party alone. This change was consolidated in 2019 in the elections that resulted in Spain’s first coalition government between the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) and Podemos. It is the most left-leaning government since the beginning of democracy in Spain. The second issue, and central to the process of VOX’s emergence, is the territorial crisis experienced in Spain as a result of the Catalan conflict and Catalonia’s declaration of independence in 2017. The most recent studies point to the political crisis related to the Catalan conflict as central to the emergence of VOX, and the resurgence of a Spanish nationalist identity sentiment (Arroyo Menéndez, 2020; Garrido Rubia et al., 2022). Moreover, the VOX’ electoral success took place in the context of a favorable economy, in a Spain dominated by the debate about where Catalonia fits in the territorial and political landscape, the mobilization and show of force of organized feminism, and finally, the so-called “refugee crisis” in the Mediterranean and the increase in the numbers of immigrants (Mendes & Dennison, 2021). The arrival of immigrants and the perception of Spanish public opinion on immigration is closely linked to its media impact, and how the entry of foreigners into Spain is depicted. In the years prior to the electoral rise of VOX, there was a growth in the arrival of foreignersFootnote 1 by sea (around 55,000 entries), an increase in entries at the Melilla fence, and finally, government support for the reception of refugees in Spain. This change in government stance did not translate into solidarity in accordance with the circumstances due to the Spanish state being one of the least generous in Europe in the reception of refugees. However, the social perception of immigration as a problem, as the media presence of immigration multiplied, provoked this greater polarization around the migratory issue associated with media representation (Gálvez-Iniesta & Groizard, 2021; González-Enríquez & Rinken, 2021).

This chapter is structured into the following four sections. The first is the theoretical framework used to address the characteristics of radical right-wing forces in Europe, and specifically, it studies how VOX fits into this political trend. I will then focus on explaining the main academic contributions that analyze the discourse of the European radical right forces in subjects such as gender equality and immigration. In the second section, I briefly explain the methodology used. In the third section, the main results of the content analysis of VOX parliamentary discourses are presented. To briefly highlight the main results, we can find on the one hand, the strong connection between the attacks on gender equality in VOX are strongly linked to a defense of a traditional family model. On the other hand, the analysis of VOX’s political discourse shows that VOX’s rejection of immigration is linked to nativist positions and a strong nationalist ideology, which seeks to reinforce the hegemony of the rights and privileges of Spanish nationals. Finally, some brief conclusions are presented that include reflections on future developments in this line of research.

2 Vox: A New Radical Right-Wing Party in Spain

The parties that make up the European populist radical right are characterized by their formal defense of the liberal democratic regime in opposition to extreme right parties that are steeped in a legacy of fascist ideology, as political forces characterized by their outright rejection of the constitutional order, and may seek to subvert the democratic status quo (Pirro, 2022). As it may represent for the Spanish case, “Falange Española de las JONS” which would advocate an authoritarian political regime. However, within the family of the European radical populist right, there are political forces that openly defend anti-democratic positions and are more closely linked to neo-fascism (Akkerman, 2003; Minkenberg, 2015), such as the Alternative für Deutschland in Germany party (Blum, in this volume). Also, we can find political forces such as Fidesz -led by Viktor Orbán -in Hungary that are characterized by authoritarian traits that may demonstrate a governmental practice typical of a competitive authoritarian regime, where the political elite organizes the state rules and the political scene for electoral and political advantages unbefitting of a liberal democratic regime (Bozóki & Cueva, 2021).

In overall terms, these organizations defend the following positions: (a) a mono-national and monocultural vision of nation, rooted in a definition of the people as culturally homogenous; (b) nativism as an ideology that holds that states should be inhabited by members of the native group, therefore, “foreigners” (including regional nationalistic movements and immigrants) are considered enemies of the homogeneous nation; and (c) authoritarianism and the imposition of the rule of law and order, accompanied by security as an essential element of the state; (d) these parties are forces characterized by a conservative ideology and that promote the maintenance of the current social structure, and their proposals are also identified by a strong attachment to tradition and authority (Mudde, 2007; Ferreira, 2019; Climent & Montaner, 2020; Wodak, 2020). The family and its protection out of concern for its disintegration occupies a central place in the discourses of this European political family (Grzebalska & Petö, 2018). The centrality of the family and their conservative view of it gives way to positions contrary to what they pejoratively call “gender ideology”Footnote 2 (Kováts, 2017; Paternotte & Kuhar, 2017).

The uniqueness of VOX within the European radical right space in relation to migration issues and gender equality is that this party resembles the mainstream European populist radical right—as is the case in France and Sweden—while it is closer to the positions of Eastern European parties in its strategy of fighting what these conservative forces call “gender ideology”. I will now turn to the positions of the parties of the radical populist right family—and specifically the positions of VOX—on immigration, gender equality and the relationship between immigration and gender equality.

One of the recurrent themes of the populist extreme right is its anti-immigration discourse, which is explicitly anti-Muslim. Attitudes held by Europeans towards Muslim immigrants are considered most hostile in countries where political elites are more exclusive, and more tolerant where such elites are more inclusive (Czymara, 2019). Additionally, electoral support for radical right-wing parties with a strong nativist discourse, ergo anti-immigration, is related to pre-existing positions rooted in conservative values that activate an anti-immigration sentiment, such as law and order and traditional values (Dennison & Geddes, 2019).

The academic literature distinguishes three characteristics within the anti-immigration arguments put forward by the forces of the European radical right: (a) they are directed at an electorate that is easily identifiable based on aspects of their national identity, although this national identity may harbor ethnic and religious components—in the case of VOX, it targets Spanish nationals, white ethnicity and Catholic beliefs, i.e. these identity elements overlap; (b) they stigmatize the target group by explicitly or implicitly attributing to them qualities considered to be undesirable; and (c) as a result of these perceived negative traits, immigrants are viewed as an unwelcome and hostile presence (Skenderovic, 2007; Parekh, 2012; Ackerman, 2018). This political family of parties also feeds the concept of “welfare chauvinism”, by which is meant the fear that some less-privileged social groups harbor towards the immigrant population, whom they perceive as their competitors for limited social welfare resources. Therefore, this fear transforms into a demand for the separation of social groups into levels that would limit the foreign-born population’s access to the welfare state to make it easier for the native population to have access to this right (Kymlicka, 2015). Moreover, many of these parties support the concept of a less interventionist state, although the academic literature points to the fact that the family of radical right populist parties in Western Europe is characterized by more neoliberal economic proposals (Otjes et alia, 2018). For example, VOX is in favor of imposing greater restrictions on access to residence permits for immigrants in an irregular situation, as well as stressing the requirement for foreign residents to make an effort to “integrate” into Spanish society. They also propose to match the entry of immigrant flows to the requirements of the Spanish economy. Finally, they are staunch defenders of greater border control, just as they are committed to increasing security measures, expelling, and implementing tougher penalties for immigrants in an irregular situation (VOX, 2019 and 2021). In line with Trump’s program to erect a wall at the US border with Mexico, they support the building of a wallFootnote 3 in Ceuta and Melilla to guarantee national sovereignty (Barrio, 2020). Such political parties consider Muslim foreign residents to be a threat to security, leading to a call for the closure of “fundamentalist mosques”, and the exclusion of Islam from public education (Ferreira, 2019; Rubio-Pueyo, 2019).

Extreme right-wing forces are opposed to gender equality in Europe, they are characterized by their defense of a biological construction of sexual difference, and therefore are committed to traditional gender roles. These forces regard the family, rather than individuals, as the elementary repository of rights and duties (Safuta, in this volume). This support for the traditional family results in opposition to women’s sexual and reproductive rights (Spierings & Zaslove, 2015; Alabao, 2019; Kantola & Lombardo, 2019). In her classic work Gender and Nation, Yuval-Davis (2004) points out that nationalist projects begin from the assumption that women are the nation’s biological reproducers and its repositories of culture and national identity. Far right-wing parties have an antifeminist agenda, often labelled as “anti-gender ideology” by proponents. This term that stems from attempts made by religious sectors to defend their vision of the ontological difference between and the complementarity of the sexes (Kováts, 2017; Dancygier, 2020). In its treatment of gender issues VOX is closer to the stance of Eastern European parties, than to that of France or Sweden’s neo right-wing. VOX defends the relevance of the traditional family, denies the discrimination faced by women, and opposes gender ideology, a fight personalized in their opposition to the feminist movement, for which they demand the ending of state financing of feminist organizations (Alabao, 2019; Rubio-Pueyo, 2019). In relation to VOX’s discourse on gender equality, Alonso and Espinosa-Fajardo point to the existence of two strategies they use in their parliamentary discourses in the region of Andalusia: a) framing gender inequality as a non-existent problem, and b) framing gender equality policies as part of “totalitarian” feminist project (Alonso & Espinosa-Fajardo, 2021).

For VOX, equality between men and women in Spain is a fact, therefore, a policy aimed at achieving this goal is unnecessary. Moreover, they consider that the current gender equality policy promoted by the institutions and based on feminist ideology is a threat to society, because it weakens institutions such as the family and the sexual division of labor. Moreover, for VOX, this political force constantly points to immigration as a threat to Spanish women, and this threat would translate into gender-based or sexual violence (Fernández-Suárez, 2021; Bernardez-Rodal et al., 2022). Therefore, the link between anti-gender equality and anti-immigration discourse of the European radical right is made by means of the instrumentalization of foreigners, who are perceived as enemies of the gender equality achieved by Western civilization (Kantola & Lombardo, 2019). Moreover, it is common in the discourses of this family of parties to accuse immigrants of putting women’s safety at risk, more specifically, the free presence of women in the public space and their physical and psychological integrity in the private space. The association they make between immigration and women’s insecurity is linked to crimes of gender violence, sexual violence, harassment in public space, etc. (Sager & Mulinari, 2018). Anti-immigration parties emphasize the cultural dimension of globalisation to highlight the danger posed by immigrants, specifically, how they threaten the freedoms acquired in the West, mainly those rights won by women. This relationship between gender and immigration appears to be conditioned by the different cultures of gender equality in Europe, with it being much more rooted in the Nordic countries than in Southern Europe. An example of this relationship between gender and immigration can be seen in the application of what have been called “new assimilation policies”. Immigrant integration contracts place an emphasis on “gender equality” as a national cultural symbol and as a core Western value, in comparison to the patriarchal cultures of migrant communities (Mulinari & Neergaard, 2017; Scrinzi, 2017). This connection is evident in the case of France, through the application of the “republican” model of immigrant integration based on individualism, universality, and secularism. State feminism in France tends to racialize sexism, presenting migrants as a threat to “sexual democracy”, thus making the sexism present in wider French society invisible (Fassin, 2006; Scrinzi, 2017). This debate played out in the prohibition of wearing a veil in public, with the resulting controversy dividing French feminist activists into two dichotomous positions. Pro-equality stances are exploited by radical right-wing parties in some European countries (France, the Netherlands, and Sweden) to frame anti-immigration strategy in the political arena. The racialization of sexism consists of instrumentally mobilizing pseudo-feminist discourse to gain electoral support and legitimize opposition to immigration (Scrinzi, 2014). How VOX makes this association between immigration and the position of women in Spain in its parliamentary speeches is the key question addressed in this chapter.

3 Methodology

This chapter has a qualitative methodological approach based on the application of two techniques: documentary analysis and content analysis of political discourse.

Concerning the document analysis, I examined existing VOX policy documents: the party statutes and the policy measures proposed by VOX in the document “Agenda España” [Spain Agenda] in 2021. I also examined the VOX electoral programs for the 2019 general elections called “100 medidas para la España Viva” [100 measures for a Living Spain].

The discursive construction of the relationship between gender and immigration in VOX discourse is analyzed through the parliamentary speeches taken from the Parliamentary Record of the Congress of Deputies during the XIII legislature, from May 21st, 2019, to September 24th, 2019, and the XIV legislature, beginning on December third, 2019, with the analysis being carried out until April third, 2020. In short, I have carried out a 1-year monitoring of the parliamentary interventions of this political force.

These data -VOX’s official documents and discourses made by representatives of VOX taken from the Parliamentary Record of the Congress of Deputies- were selected and classified using the ATLAS.ti. Discourses referring to immigrants (and migration policies) and women (and gender equality policies) were selected. These specific data were then categorized using a previously selected coding system based on the research objectives. For instance, I approached the content analysis deductively according to Krippendorf (1990), through the systematic analysis of content by making inferences (deductions) through the identification of characteristics of a text considering the social context in which it is produced. Specifically, in my research I have started from some previous categories that have helped me to carry out a thematic description of VOX’s positions on gender equality and the presence of immigrants in Spain. Tesch (1990) points out that in social science research it is common to use some form of prior indexing, or that it is an a posteriori process that emerges during the work of processing the textual corpus. In the case of the present research, the previously chosen codes are related to political positions about immigration and women/gender equality, and from these broad categories, subcategories were created to facilitate the subsequent analysis of the research results. Text extracts from documents and speeches were classified according to this system.

4 Vox, the Conservative Reaction Against Gender Equality and Immigration

The analysis of results presented below will be divided into three parts. First, the characteristics of VOX’s parliamentary discourse and policy proposals on immigration will be presented. Secondly, the analysis will focus on the positions of this force in relation to gender equality in Spain. Finally, it will analyze the existing connections in VOX’s discourse and proposals on immigration and gender, as a mechanism that reinforces the intersectional bordering against migrants and women.

4.1 VOX’s Anti-immigration Discourse: When the Enemy Is a Foreigner

In relation to VOX’s position on immigration, four main strands of discourse stand out. First, an increase in border controls and greater priority given to migrants from Latin America, with legal entry being conditional on the needs of the labour market. Second, the criminalization of immigrants in an irregular administrative situation that entails an increase in penalties, with this irregularity being considered a felony associated with an increase in crime and greater insecurity in Spain. The third argument is the demand for a greater effort to be made by immigrants in a regular situation to integrate, accompanied by claims of Welfare State abuse, to which they call for access to be regulated, with priority given to nationals. And fourthly, a fight against Islam, personalized in its opposition to immigrants from countries of the Maghreb residing in Spain. The following positions will be discussed in more detail below.

VOX is a political organization that, according to its internal documents, has among its goals the protection of the union of the Spanish nation, the sovereignty of which resides in the whole of the Spanish people, the custody of the equality of all Spaniards before the law, the protection of private property and the free market economy, the defense of individual freedoms and the democratic system and the preservation of the right to life and traditional family values. In its 2019 manifesto, for both general elections held that year, VOX called for “100 measures for España Viva” [Living Spain], including two sections outlining measures for immigration and for border security and control. 15 measures out of a total of 100 proposals on these topics are developed for both sections, indicating the relevance afforded to them. In general terms, the proposals relate to the criminalization of irregular immigration, support for greater immigration control measures, increased penalties to combat irregular immigration, the refusal to regularize immigrants in irregular administrative situations, the criminalization and punishment of street vending, greater integration effort required to gain access to Spanish nationality, a preference for so-called “Ibero-American immigration”, a reduction in social welfare rights such as free health care for immigrants in an irregular administrative situation, anti-Islam measures (such as, for example, the exclusion of Islam from the educational system,Footnote 4 and the prohibition and closure of mosques), the demand for data on nationality and origin in crime statistics to be published and, finally, the proposal to build a wall to protect Ceuta and Melilla. In VOX’s 2021 document “Agenda España” [Agenda Spain] this party relates immigration as a failed policy to counteract the demographic winter, while “imposing anti-family policies” (VOX, 2021: 25).

VOX’s central anti-immigration arguments, that can be seen by analyzing the discourses they give in the Congress of Deputies, are related to their ideas regarding loss of cultural identity, and demonstrate that they are, in short, opposed to a multicultural society. VOX considers the entry and residence of immigrants in an irregular administrative situation in Spain to be a crime. They are staunch defenders of the tightening of policies to control immigration, and of only allowing entry to Spain of people with a regular migration status who meet the demands of the labour market. They also prefer the cultural and linguistic similarity of so-called “Ibero-American migrants” above those from the Maghreb. Finally, they associate irregular immigration with greater crime and insecurity in Spain, even associating this immigration with an increase in sexual crimes against women (VOX, 2022).

The association between foreigners and crime has strong connections to VOX’s ideology of reinforcing internal and external security, and of the defense of law and order as pillars of society. The criminalization of irregular immigration is a constant in VOX speeches, taking the position that orderly immigration is the only entry option, while additionally supporting an increase in punitive penalties for immigrants in an irregular situation. It is especially here where women are used to foment opposition to immigration (Kantola & Lombardo, 2019, Spierings & Zaslove, 2015), particularly associated with accusations of sexual crimes against foreigners. The women who suffer these sexual assaults are presented as being ignored by proponents of “gender ideology” and “feminism”, who would conceal reports of such crimes to avoid growing xenophobia, while publicly denouncing sexual assaults committed by male nationals, thus belying the assumption of equal treatment. Associations between increased sexual violence and immigration in working-class suburbs were common in the media during the conservative government of Nicolas Sarkozy in France, resulting in a racialization of sexism by attributing it to immigrants, thus making the sexism present in wider French society invisible (Fassin, 2006; Scrinzi, 2017). These statements are contextualized in the following declaration made by representatives of VOX in the Congress of Deputies.

This very week we have learned of new packs of savages attempting to rape women, but, as the perpetrators are foreigners, their crimes are conveniently silenced by feminism (…). Do you really think you are capable of convincing Spaniards that the dozens of illegal immigrants, mostly Muslims, have nothing to do with this new type of aggression, with the increase in assaults against women, against homosexuals?

[Parliamentary Record of the Congress of Deputies, 29th August 2019]

With regard to immigration, VOX has a vision of religious diversity that aligns them closer to the parties of the radical right in Eastern Europe than to similar forces present in France or in the Nordic countries. Specifically, VOX’s conservative ideology considers Catholicism to be national cultural heritage worthy of preservation. Faced with the threat of Islam, they uphold “Christian civilization” as the foundation of Europe. Their hobbyhorse centers around the demonization of Islam as a belief that is harmful to Western society. As previously mentioned, VOX’s general election manifesto contained several proposals to deport imams who “spread jihad, fundamentalism, and contempt for women”, eliminate the teaching of Islam from the public education system, and ban mosques that promote fundamentalist interpretations of Islam. An association is made in VOX’s discourse about immigration, radical Islamic beliefs, and terrorism. The “cowardly little right wing” and the “progressive dictatorship”, common terms used by the leaders of VOX to refer to their political adversaries on the right and the left, are, they claim, incapable of halting the onslaught of the Islamization of Europe due to their deep-rooted multicultural and liberal creed. In this extract from a speech by Abascal, the leader of VOX in the Congress of Deputies, it can be seen how the arrival of refugees in Europe is associated with terrorist attacks, problems of coexistence, security, and the economy. The connection felt by Abascal and his admiration for the Hungarian Prime Minister Víktor Orbán of the Fidesz-Hungarian Civic Union party is also evident.

When he defended the will of the Hungarian people and warned that these avalanches pose a real danger, VOX alone supported Mr. Orbán, whose diagnosis we share, including the diagnosis of terrorist infiltration that you systematically conceal. (…) Mr. Orbán, who, of course, was accused of the same thing that I am going to be accused of: of racism, of xenophobia, of a lack of solidarity, and so on. (…). You know, although you keep quiet about it, you must know that in many European cities there are neighborhoods where Islamic law, and not civil law, prevails.

[Parliamentary Record of the Congress of Deputies, 29th de August 2019]

The third anti-immigration argument is aimed at combating liberal stances taken by political forces favorable to immigration, such as: in addition to meeting the needs of the Spanish labour market for foreign labour, immigrants contribute to a slowing down of the aging of the population. VOX’s nativist foundations, and the European extreme right’s concern that an ethnic substitution of nationals by foreigners does not take place, is founded in conservative positions at the core of the demographic. Recurrent calls are made to reverse the pressing European population problem, the “demographic winter” caused by a fall in the birth rate and an increasingly aging population, with proposals supporting traditional families with dependent children. In its document “Agenda España” [Agenda Spain] VOX states: “Open border policies and multicultural societies have failed in the West and countries such as Belgium, France and the United Kingdom are the most obvious example. Despite this, the globalist elites are betting on the arrival of millions of illegal immigrants in the coming years with the aim of reversing the demographic winter while imposing anti-family policies” (VOX, 2021: 25). The nativist agenda is at the center of the identity of European radical right parties (Spierings & Zaslove, 2015), with VOX also fully assuming this political trait. The preference for Spanish nationals would serve to preserve the integrity of the traditional family, as this forms the fundamental basis of the social order of the nation.

Finally, a recurring anti-immigration (especially immigrants in an irregular administrative situation) argument that VOX makes links them to welfare state abuse. Once again, VOX would apply a principle of nationals first in accessing welfare state benefits, which in turn would be depleted by their defense of the free market. VOX speeches constantly affirm that Spanish nationals are deprived of social assistance in favor of foreigners, in short, activating the arguments of “welfare chauvinism”. In its policy document “Agenda España” (Agenda Spain) this force defends the national priority in social benefits: “Promotion of the necessary legal mechanisms to guarantee the priority of Spanish citizens in access to social benefits”. Another example of this type of statement can be seen below, in a VOX speech given in the Congress of Deputies.

You probably know and don’t care, so, Madam Vice President, answer me if you can: how much does illegal immigration cost to Spaniards, how much does it cost to maintain the centres for unaccompanied minors—you said 14,000€—how much money, how much crime, how many problems of coexistence, so that you can continue to comply with orders from Brussels?

[Parliamentary Record of the Congress of Deputies, 29th August 2019]

VOX’s discourse, as well as recurrently focusing on positions against the entry of immigrants, also has among its central arguments the defense of the traditional family, the fight against gender equality, and especially, its constant criticism of the feminist movement and its postulates, as we can see in the following section.

4.2 VOX and Its Argument Against “Gender Ideology”

The research carried out into the discourse of VOX in relation to the role of women in Spanish society highlights the following arguments: the family and traditional gender roles, especially that of the mother, are central to its ideology; Feminism is an ideology believed to be capable of destroying the institution of the family, thus it is necessary to eliminate the network of organizations that receive financial support to implement their idea of gender equality; and, finally, the affirmation that men are discriminated against and denied equal treatment to women, for which their defense in litigation for gender violence, divorce, etc. is necessary.

VOX’s general election manifestos contain a series of proposals directly or indirectly related to gender equality policies. In the section on health, promises are made to abolish public funding for abortions and gender affirmation surgery. The section on education contains promises to establish a requirement to seek parental consent for school activities with ethical, social, moral, or sexual content. In the section on “Life and Family”, a call to repeal the law on gender violence, and any regulations that discriminate between the sexes is made, support for opposition to enacting a domestic violence law, and the “abolition of subsidies for radical feminist organizations” is voiced, the prosecution of false reporting of gender violence, and the protection of the minor in divorce proceedings through joint custody, greater family work-life balance achieved by means of the promotion of teleworking and part-time jobs, and finally, an increase in maternity leave to 180 days.

VOX’s central arguments opposing what they consider “gender ideology” and the feminist movement, put forward in their appearances in the Congress of Deputies center on the defense of the “natural family” as the basis for the reproduction of society, the division of gender roles, and the staunch defense of nativism that situate them in opposition to reproductive rights (for example, abortion) that deprive the nation of new members. In addition, they claim that so-called “gender ideology” would seek to impose its principles on the educational system, and to demonize men, just because they are men, and by refusing them the same right as women to report violent situations in family settings. They are also opposed to the public aid system that grants resources to third-sector entities espousing feminist ideology and specializing in gender equality issues. These arguments are accompanied by an uncompromising defense of the institution of the family, supported by family friendly policies which lead to the reconstruction of the figure of the mother as the main caregiver, such as an increase in maternity leave, economic support for families with dependent children, and benefits for large families.

For VOX, feminism is an ideology that stands in opposition to the family, the cornerstone of society and part of the natural and biological order of things. The defense of the traditional family implies the assumption of gender roles and the sexual division of labour (Spierings & Zaslove, 2015; Alabao, 2019; Kantola & Lombardo, 2019). For VOX, women are the biological and social reproducers of the nation, that is, they are potential mothers within its nationalist vision. VOX’s conservatism leads them to affirm that left-wing parties are in favor of the destruction of the traditional family, that by facilitating the right to abortion they fail to advocate the protection of life. Moreover, for this political force “being a woman” is a biological fact. In their positions and speeches, we can see how they criticize the idea that gender is a social and cultural construction. This defense of the biological and of what they call ‘human nature’ leads them to attack not only feminist theory, but also queer theory and the rights of transgender people. Below is an excerpt from a speech made by a representative of VOX making a case for the traditional gender roles associated with women and defending the institution of the traditional family.

We have a State that invests more in death than in life and thus, of course, with a birth rate that is lower than replacement-level, along with the 2.5 million unborn children since 1985, which would have greatly alleviated this lack of generational replacement. (…) But you don’t just want to abolish the family, ladies and gentlemen, you clearly want to abolish the family: by abolishing women. For this reason, we at VOX, want to denounce this monopoly of the left, the left that tells us what a woman should think and be in order to be a woman.

[Parliamentary Record of the Congress of Deputies, 18th February 2020]

VOX accuses organizations that promote the implementation of “state feminism policies” of being part of a privileged elite that stand to obtain substantial resources from the Welfare State. This is one of the standard arguments of the radical right, the plundering of the people’s resources by the liberal elite. Moreover, as Blum (in this volume) points out, in the populist narratives of the radical right the question of the exclusion of certain social groups from access to certain rights is very present. And, as this scholar shows, issues of gender and sexuality are a good example of “welfare-nostalgic” positions, as well as welfare-chauvinist ones, which seek to reinforce social rights associated with old social risks and based on traditional economic and conservative family forms. This formulation perceives both third sector organizations that work towards gender equality, and NGOs that serve the foreign resident population, as ideological entities that therefore should not be subsidized by the public treasury. In addition to the premise that such pro-equality organizations are ideologically driven, it is also argued that gender violence policies discriminate against men by not granting them the same rights in the event of a report of domestic violence, once again questioning the structural disadvantage of women compared to men. VOX in its program and in its speeches calls for the abolition of the current law against gender violence in Spain, to be replaced by a law on domestic violence. This proposal would seek to protect the integrity of the family and all its members, because for them the woman is not the only victim. Finally, VOX defends the increase of prison sentences—permanent revisable prison—for cases of sexual violence and murders within the family of exceptional gravity. This punitive populism serves to proclaim themselves defenders of (Spanish) women, as opposed to left-wing forces that would reduce prison sentences for these crimes. In this measure, one can see a commitment to security that is associated with a harsh and martial vision of masculinity and the role of the state (Álvarez-Benavides & Jiménez Aguilar, 2021). Moreover, in their statements VOX leaders point to immigrants as being responsible for most cases of gender violence, just as they accuse them of being responsible for most cases of sexual assault. The following excerpt refers to these arguments. This punitive populism serves to proclaim themselves defenders of women, in the face of liberal forces that would reduce prison sentences for these crimes. In the extract below, reference is made to these arguments.

The total dedicated to gender violence will be almost 285 million. The budget is being increased for an oversized problem that has an average of 60 victims a year, when there are causes of death in Spain that produce a much higher number of victims and for which not a single euro is allocated. This expenditure of 285 million euros ends up in associations, political quangos and only a tiny part goes to the victims, who are the ones who really need it. The EUR 285 million is earmarked for a discriminatory purpose that goes against the principle of equality, as it only goes to women who are victims of a white heterosexual man. Nothing for elderly men, minors or homosexuals.

285 million euros for a plan that has proved to be ineffective, as it has not reduced the number of victims. 285 million to impose their totalitarian ideology, which only responds to sectarian and propagandistic intentions. Publicizing feminism, victimizing women and demonizing men. As the current law against gender violence does not work and has not reduced the number of victims, investing more money in a plan that is ineffective is suicidal. What this money is going towards is campaigns to spread the idea that men are violent by nature and women are victims just because they are women. This money goes to indoctrinating companies and all public authorities. It goes to interfere in the education of our children to indoctrinate them according to feminist rules, it is invested in a telephone hotline and reinforcement of telematic means of monitoring, instead of increasing the penalties against aggressors and applying permanent imprisonment, as proposed by VOX.

[Parliamentary Record of the Congress of Deputies, 26th October 2021]

In addition to the importance of immigration and gender equality in VOX speeches, in the next section, we will see how this political argumentation towards these two issues connects with each other, and feeds back on each other.

4.3 The Reactionary Rhizome: The Association Between Immigration and Gender Equality in VOX Discourse

The results of the data analyzed show that VOX makes an association between irregular immigration, mainly that of Muslims, and an increase in crime, specifically sexual violence against women. As with other European radical right-wing parties, Catholicism is praised as a cultural element rooted in Western civilization in contrast to Muslim societies where women enjoy fewer freedoms.

Gender discourse is racialized to demonize the multicultural model associated with liberal values. In VOX we find a vision of women as potential victims of the foreign “other”, which is justified by a representation of women as being oppressed by the primitive culture of the foreigner, and the need for them to be freed from this threat by native men, since their agency as social actors is withdrawn. Ultimately, the burden of cultural representation weighs on women, as they are viewed as the symbolic carriers of the identity and honor of the community (Yuval-Davis, 2004).

As mentioned at the start of this section, in their parliamentary speeches, VOX makes an association between so-called “immigration in an irregular administrative situation”, mainly that of Muslims and (sexual) violence against native Spanish women. In its defense of Christianity as the essence of European civilization and its opposition to immigration from Muslim countries, due to such immigrants not holding liberal values, VOX is in line with European radical right-wing parties. But far from performing the “rhetorical U-turn” made by Marine Le Pen, leader of the Rassemblement National, where she assumed a position that is more favorable to gender equality, VOX tactically uses women in its discourse to set an anti-immigration agenda, promote an anti-multicultural model and demonstrate its aversion to the Muslim immigrant community. Women and the family are represented as potential victims at the hands of foreigners, so it will be native men who must protect women, and in turn, defend the nation. VOX accuses the other political parties of failing in their attempts to protect women from such attacks and offers an increase in sentences associated with these crimes as a solution. The last extract in the previous section [VOX and its argument against “gender ideology”] can be used to support the assertions made in this paragraph.

VOX’s political ideology can be defined by its strong conservatism, its centralist nationalism, and its defense of nativism as fundamental foundational principles. These elements will undoubtedly make a change of discourse around immigration and gender equality unlikely. However, a discursive shift in relation to the acceptance of certain measures in support of equality between men and women would be more likely than a change in tone around certain types of immigration. VOX’s manifesto and parliamentary speeches place greater emphasis on increasing immigration controls and hardening Spanish immigration policies than on issues derived from the fight against feminism as an ideology, although such issues are also present, associated with a defense of the traditional family and nationalist concern for the reproduction of the nation in demographic and cultural terms.

Immigration—especially those in an irregular administrative situation and who practice the Muslim faith—and gender equality policies are two of the most recurrent themes against which VOX’s political discourse is positioned. The arrival of immigrants causes the disintegration of a homogenous Spanish national identity capable of destroying the nation’s ethos. Foreigners as external enemies would be the alter ego of peripheral nationalism in Spain. The questioning by women of their position of subalternity with respect to men, and gender equality policies are seen by VOX as a threat to the family, the fundamental pillar of Spanish society. VOX has been able to recover the social imaginary of Francoism when it comes to making a political proposal based on Spanish national identity, family policies as an element to be promoted, and the defense of conservative and Catholic values in its vision of gender relations. Faced with a globalizing agenda, VOX’s migratory response would be the closing of borders, and the vision of the “other” as a potential threat. The foreigner as anthropological fear would threaten and violate communities through violence towards women, “mother-women” are seen by this force in their passive and reproductive roles through the institution of the family.

5 Conclusions

The present chapter leaves the door open to further research into the role of VOX in relation to the topics investigated. A line of research that could be developed in the future consists of an analysis of the extent to which VOX’s incorporation into the establishment might result in an abandonment of its extremist positions, and a greater focus on positions related to gender equality and immigration And finally, further research into the impact or influence of the presence of VOX on the other parliamentary forces of the Spanish political spectrum would be beneficial, along with an investigation into the extent to which a political force like VOX is able to strengthen immigration policies and modify or reduce support for gender equality policies by means of their speeches and proposals. Furthermore, as for other forces from the far-right in Europe, VOX’s public discourse presents a series of contradictions with respect to gender, sexual and racist/anti-migrant discrimination. A number of paradoxical stances—e.g., mobilizing the threat of migrants against gender equality, while undermining gender equality through the promotion of “traditional” gender relations—which can and will most likely translate into a complex interplay of intersectional bordering(s).