In the Fight for Women’s Rights: The Deception of Femonationalism
By Evelyn Howe ‘25
Feminism is under attack. Hiding under the guise of rallying for female equality, politicians have usurped feminist language in order to justify xenophobic, racist, and sexist policies and ideologies. Alarmingly, this trend of far-right politicians hijacking feminist language in order to promote their own agendas, a phenomenon coined by scholar Sara Farris as “femonationalism”, has become increasingly common as politicians aim to attract younger generations of voters and become more accepted in the political sphere.
While femonationalist leaders may espouse support for “women’s rights” and portray themselves as champions of women’s safety, autonomy and independence, one should not be so easily deceived. Behind the feminist rhetoric and appeals to allyship, the position of these politicians is rooted in anti-feminist, anti-immigrant ideals, which only serve to further entrench the subordination of women, particularly those who are already less privileged. The feminationalist narrative is often constructed as such: women, particularly those in non-western countries, are suffering as “agentless objects at the mercy of their patriarchal cultures,” and it is the duty of the West to “save” these women from their “uncivilized” cultures. Such rhetoric was exemplified in Former President Nicolas Sarkozy’s 2009 speech to the French Parliament, in which he supported the French ban on face coverings:
"The issue of the burqa is not a religious issue, it is a question of freedom and of women’s dignity...the burqa is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement... We cannot accept that some women in our country are prisoners behind a grille, cut off from social life, deprived of their identity".
Here, language surrounding women's "freedom'' and "dignity" is included to frame the issue as one of women's rights. By outwardly denying that the burqa ban had “religious” implications, Sarkozy attempts to conceal the xenophobic nature of this policy. To refer to the burqa as a "sign of debasement" and to portray Muslim women as "deprived prisoners" reinforces the aformentioned narrative structure – that “powerless” Muslim women are in need of protection from Muslim men, who are “perpetrators” of sexist oppression, and that the culturally superior West should be provide this protection.
More recently, on March 7th 2021, Switzerland also passed a ban on the burqa, a full-body covering that is traditionally worn by Muslim women. Femonationalist rhetoric was similarly present in the justification of this policy to portray Muslim women as “imprisoned behind [the] veil.” This co-opting of feminist language was supplemented by the posters presented by the far-right Swiss People’s Party. The image displays a Muslim, burqa-wearing woman with a scowling facial expression, the slogan “Stop Extremism!”, which immediately associates the wearing of burqas to extremist violence. The deep red backdrop only further evokes this sense of danger and the need to “act” against this perceived threat. Unfortunately, advertisements like these, which are supposedly in support of “feminist” policies, only serve to elicit anti-immigrant sentiments and the stigmatization of women who are already marginalized by misrepresenting muslim women as believers of an inherently “violent” religion, who are unable to integrating into society. As Rim-Sarah Alouane states in this article: “Switzerland’s crackdown on Islamic symbols is normalizing anti-Muslim bigotry across the political spectrum.”
Femonationalism is pernicious because it is deceptive; while it may seem to be a progressive movement to liberate women, its regressive undercurrents mean that it does the exact opposite. By appropriating the language of feminism, not only do leaders further entrench the portrayal of women as powerless subjects, but in doing so stoke xenophobic sentiments and justify state control of women’s bodies and livelihood – in 2016, french police forced muslims women who were wearing full body swimsuits (or burkinis) to take off their clothing following the burkini ban, and in 2018, a muslim teacher from Berlin was banned from wearing her headscarf and subsequently became unemployed.
Perhaps what is most terrifying about femontionalism is that it relegates feminism into a mere means to an end, a tool that aids leaders in the implementation of xenophobic policies under the guise of fighting for women’s rights. As Nina Power rightly puts it, “Feminism [becomes] something merely to invoke to convince fence-sitting morally-minded voters that war is the only option on the table” (Power [Page 12])). Is it essential then, that as the new generation of feminists and human rights advocates, we must work to distance feminism from nationalism and prevent the co-opting of feminist ideals for far-right politics. When we state that we are fighting in “the name of women’s rights”, we should fight for what feminism truly stands for – the upholding of equal treatment and access to opportunity for women and men, to protection of the rights and livelihood of women, and the empowerment of humanity.