Masculinity and Sexuality in Populist Radical Right Leadership

Abstract

Research shows that masculinity and sexuality are pivotal to the leadership and success of the populist radical right (PRR). In particular, normative conceptions of masculinity, as seen in gendered nationalism, have been argued to be important to the appeal of PRR parties. However, the supply side of this dynamic remains understudied. To fill this gap, this article uses critical discourse analysis to analyze the role of masculinity and sexuality in the self-positioning and envisioned hegemonies of the most successful Dutch PRR leaders: Pim Fortuyn, Geert Wilders, and Thierry Baudet. The Dutch case is particularly insightful as it presents a diverse array of PRR parties in one country context. We found crucial similarities and differences between the discourses of these leaders. Our findings suggest that masculinity and sexuality, while constitutive at the party level, are largely negotiable or nondefining for the larger party family. These findings problematize often-made identifications of PRR politics with a one-of-a-kind conservative ideology of gender and sexuality.

Women's Empowerment in Fulfilling the Affirmative Quota of Election Supervisors

“…This statement is similar to that conveyed by Connell who views masculinity as a constellation that is always contrasted with femininity, but masculinities that are different reinforce each other (Connell, 2005). The hegemony of masculinity functions as an answer to the problem of patriarchal culture (Linders, Dudink and Spierings, 2022). Where patriarchal culture does not only occur in Indonesia but almost all over the world there is still a very strong patriarchal culture in the political world.…”

Evaluating the concept of political masculinity/ies: a simple idea or a case of too many ideas?

“…First, most studies citing political masculinity concern specific examples of different types or forms of political masculinity (see, for example, Myrttinen, 2019;Geva, 2020;Ozbay and Soybakis, 2020). There is a clear tendency (pace Caravantes, 2019;Myrttinen, 2019) to focus on right-wing and authoritarian leaders (see, for example, Ekşi and Wood, 2019;Geva, 2020;Linders et al, 2023) rather than the wider spectrum of political actors.…”

Sovereignty, Discipline, Governmentality, and Pastorate: The Ménage à Quatre of Contemporary Authoritarian and Right-Wing Populist Power

“…Since pastoral power is aimed at protecting the flock against existential dangers, the devotional side of the pastor needs to be accompanied by a particular determination, strength, and rigorous leadership. This aspect of pastoral power comes to the fore in the masculinization of populist politics (see e.g., Löffler et al, 2020; Linders et al, 2022; see for the Philippines Navera, 2021; for Hungary and Poland Grzebalska & Pető, 2018; for Turkey and Russia Eksi & Wood, 2019; and for India Kinnvall, 2019) and is mirrored, for instance, in Trump’s alpha-male self-portrayal, Bolsonaro’s self-presentation as a tough motorcycle guy, the PIS’ and Orbán’s rethoric about an (alleged) feminization of politics, as well as in the accentuation of Modi’s “‘manly’ leadership style, […] able to overcome the ‘effeminate’ leadership style espoused by Manmohan Singh (his predecessor)” (Kinnvall, 2019, p. 296). 8 While this masculinization is also reflected in the fact that the overwhelming majority of authoritarian and right-wing populist leaders are men, the example of the Fratelli-led government in Italy shows that this does not necessarily exclude women to become the main representatives of the attempted masculinization of politics—in the case of Le Pen and Meloni with the gendered self-portrayal as mother lions for their people (see for the ambivalent, that is, “softer” media representation of female populist leaders Snipes & Mudde, 2020).…”