State feminism or party feminism? Feminist politics and the Spanish Institute of Women

This article argues that it is misleading to analyse recent strategies regarding the state used by feminists in countries such as Spain, as examples of state feminism, because the meaning of the term is confused. The article discusses several cases of 'state feminism' and shows that the term is used in such a variety of contexts and to refer to such contrasting and even contradictory phenomena that it is in danger of having any real meaning sucked out of it altogether. Furthermore, the article proposes that both the use of the term 'state feminism' and the analyses of the various national experiences to which it refers underplay the role of the party in power at the time in which they occurred. To illustrate this, the article traces the origins of the Spanish Institute for Women back to the political commitments on sex equality made by the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE), and shows how these developed steadily under pressure from organized feminists inside the party. The article suggests that the Spanish case shows that there are discontinuities in women's policy between central and regional state, and between different governing parties, whereas the term 'state' suggests permanence and continuity. It concludes that policy on women and gender equality emanating from elected public authorities, be they local or national governments, can usefully be described with the more neutral term 'state equality policies' or 'state women's policies'. Nevertheless, it is argued that their feminist content can best be understood and evaluated by reference to the compact between feminist demands and the party or parties which facilitate access to the state to women's policy activists. In this context, the article suggests that Spanish so-called state feminism is really a case of social democratic feminism in government particularly of a latecomer social democracy which responded to a wave of feminism in a post-Keynesian era.