Beyond Electoral Rules: Women Political Rights in Mexico and Brazil since Democratic Transitions

Abstract

Introduction

In 2023, in terms or women’s political representation, Mexico ranked third among thirty-three Latin American countries, with 50 percent of seats in the National Congress occupied by women, surpassing the regional average of 35.8. In contrast, Brazil held the twenty-ninth position with only 17.7 percent, ranking just above Haiti, Santa Lucia, Belize, and Antigua and Barbados in the region (CEPAL 2023). Globally, Mexico stood fifth in the percentage of women in parliament out of 186 countries, while Brazil lagged behind at 129th (UN Women 2023). Notably, Brazilian women achieved over 10 percent of such elective positions only in 2018, whereas Mexico accomplished this in 1982. These disparities persist despite both Brazil and Mexico implementing quota systems since the 1990s. Mexico further adopted the parity criterion for elective positions in 2008 and for both elective and non-elective positions at various government levels through constitutional reforms in 2014 and 2019.

What allows us to understand these distinct paths of women’s political rights in both countries? The literature has focused on highlighting differences in electoral systems, party structures, types of gender quotas, and the ability to enforce legal sanctions on parties failing to meet quotas (Archenti and Tula 2014; Johnson 2022). This article offers a different yet complementary perspective. Taking a comprehensive historical approach, it focuses on the evolving pattern of the relationship between the feminist movement, political parties, and the legislatures (and in general, the state). These different relationship patterns led to differences in the prioritization of descriptive electoral representation on feminist agendas, with a central role in Mexico and a more peripheral one in Brazil.

Based on the theory-guided process-tracing (TGPT) method, complemented with recent advances related with historical neoinstitutionalism (Collier 2011; Falleti 2016; Fioretos, Falleti, and Sheingate 2016; Johnson, Beach, and Al-Janabi 2024), we examine the decision-making process through which various initial conditions are transformed into specific outcomes (George and McKeown 1985). Building on the literature on social movements, which highlights the interplay between agency and contextual opportunities, we identify the particular historical contexts or conditions in which agents—feminist movements in this case—exercise their causal capacities (Falleti 2006). Subsequently, we aim to elucidate the logic underlying this interrelation, demonstrating how it leads to different outcomes across countries.

We argue that since the democratic transitions in Mexico and Brazil, distinct pathways have emerged, shaping the relationships between feminist movements, political parties, legislatures, and other political arenas in each country. These dynamics have, in turn, led to the development of diverse and nearly opposite trajectories in addressing feminist demands for political representation. In Mexico, political representation has been a central priority on the feminist movement’s agenda since the transition period, whereas in Brazil, this issue has not been a primary focus of the movement.

In Mexico, a prolonged democratic transition, centered on the electoral shift away from the Institutional Revolutionary Party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional, PRI), which had held executive power for seventy years, fostered a renewed legitimacy of national elections, political parties, the party system, and the division of powers. Despite the role of grassroots social movements, including the feminist movement, throughout the transition (Martinez 2001), the reinforced path in Mexico particularly emphasized a top-down logic, framed by several institutional reforms. These reforms aimed to enhance political competition among elites and rebuild trust in electoral institutions and political parties as primary mediators of sociopolitical conflicts (Labastida Martín Del Campo and Leyva 2004). The new historical contextual framework, combined with the early twentieth-century integration of women into political parties, drained a significant portion of feminist activism around the engagement with parties across the ideological spectrum, prompting women’s political rights to become pivotal agenda items concerning electoral and party institutions. Joining parties did not automatically lead to changes in party and electoral rules. Women politicians, rooted in the broader women’s movement and/or the Mexican feminist movement, incrementally and increasingly reinforced this agenda over several decades. However, until 2018, when a significant transformation of the political system began (a new critical juncture: an ongoing period of analysis that we do not include in this article), the focus on the political rights agenda of women largely overshadowed other issues, particularly those centered on doctrinal feminist issues,¹ such as abortion, which were relegated to a relatively secondary position.

In contrast, Brazil underwent a transition from a dictatorial regime to a democratic one, marked by a significant influence of popular pressure and widespread social mobilization. This movement highlighted the imperative need for the democratization of politics, polity, and policy, culminating in a constitutional reform in 1988. The flourishing and diversified women and feminist movements actively joined the opposition and expanded the parameters of the resistance effort (Alvarez 1990). In this process women began to secure institutional spaces within parties, but the connection intensified mainly with opposition parties, such as the Brazilian Democratic Movement (Movimento Democrático Brasileiro, MDB) and new emerging parties, especially those situated on the center-left of the ideological spectrum, such as the Workers’ Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores, PT) (Alvarez 1990; Pinto 2003). The affinity established with opposition parties and the civil society’s participatory project for state democratization is central to understanding why the engagement of feminists with the political system was not accomplished through representation. While women’s political rights (including descriptive representation) were a concern, they did not occupy the same central position within the movement as they did in Mexico. Beyond the limits of the electoral and party systems that help explain this outcome, we highlight that feminist choices were also shaped by their evolving relationship with the political system. This evolution unfolded in a transitional context characterized by the innovative promotion of participatory policymaking, the diversification and professionalization of the movement through non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the formation of alliances with left-wing parties.

This article further develops this argument by analyzing the distinct historical patterns of interaction between Brazilian and Mexican feminist movements and political parties, parliaments, and electoral and state institutions. These patterns emerged during democratic transitions and were shaped by different processes of agent–structure reinforcement. To complement mainstream neo-institutional political-economic perspectives explaining the significant differences in women’s access to parliamentary elective positions in both countries, we will rely on historical secondary information. During the historical analysis, we also draw on secondary information and delve into semi-structured interviews conducted with women politicians, leaders, and political feminist activists, between 2017 and 2020. We illustrate these patterns with excerpts from fifty-one interviews (thirty-one in Brazil and twenty in Mexico) with women from both countries. To capture the main heterogeneities within the feminist movement, we relied on secondary sources and employed a snowball sampling technique for the interviews.

The article is structured as follows. The first section briefly introduces the theoretical and methodological perspective chosen in this article. The second section analyzes the historical processes established in Mexico, and the third section examines this processual pattern in Brazil. Finally, the conclusions summarize the main findings and outline challenges for future research.

Emphasizing history: a complementary approach to studying women’s political rights

This article underscores the importance of incorporating historical process–based explanations to complement those focused on institutional engineering and dichotomous dimensions and static variables to understand the varying degrees and types of women's access to political rights, specifically in elective positions in parliaments. In Latin America, these explanations have frequently revolved around variations in electoral rules (Archenti 2006, 2), party systems (Caminotti 2016), specificities of quota system adopted (Marx, Borner, and Caminotti 2009; Hinojosa and Piscopo 2013), or other institutional elements (Zaremberg 2009) to account for these differences. Moreover, the role of feminist movements in achieving political rights and descriptive representation is often presumed without assessing the significance of this agenda to the movement. While institutional constraints play a central role, studies indicate that the success of quota policies and of parity also depends on other factors (Forman-Rabinovici and Nir 2021).

In this article, we draw on the long methodological tradition suggesting that historical processes shape relatively stable patterns of political behavior. Existing literature underscores the significance of temporal factors in political analysis, as emphasized by Pierson (2011). Several concepts allude to the crucial role of time in relation to occurrences and self-reinforcing historical mechanisms, such critical junctures (Collier and Collier 2002) diminishing and escalating reactive self-enforced comparative processes (Falleti and Mahoney 2015), and the traditional concept of path dependence (Fioretos, Falleti, and Sheingate 2016). Particularly, TGPT provides theoretically clear narratives that systematically trace and compare the series of events comprising the process of interest. A sequence of events implies a certain logic of interrelation between agency and context, resulting in distinct patterns. Unraveling the historical logic of these patterns enables us to better understand and explain a phenomenon. This understanding cannot be reduced to classic causality. For instance, an independent factor at one point in time may transform into a dependent variable in a subsequent moment, while a contextual structural condition can evolve into a reinforced decision made by actors. TGPT hence explores the outcomes of interest by tracing events backward in time to uncover the critical events, processes, and decisions that connect proposed causal mechanisms to the observed outcomes. In doing so, it allows for the examination of intricate causal relationships, including those involving multiple causes, feedback loops, path dependencies, tipping points, and complex interaction effects (Hall 2003). In addition, due to the complex work of tracing multiple levels of agency and structure, TGPT implies a deep syntony with small-N comparisons such as those we are undertaking in this article.

In this article, we ask how the feminist movement has interacted with the political system on an ongoing basis, within a specific and constrained context of transition and party system, and how these forms of relationships have reinforced each other over time (from the early stages of transitions in each country until 2019).

We also engage with the literature on social movements, focusing particularly on how historical institutional configurations influence the formation, performance, and outcomes of movements, beyond their internal dynamics and resources. This body of work emphasizes the concept of “political opportunity structures” (POS)—the particular combinations of resources, institutional arrangements, and historical contexts that shape social movements’ strategic choices and their ability to influence societal change (Kitschelt 1986; Tarrow 2011). Political coalitions and regimes differ in their modes of interaction, the societal demands they recognize, and the actors and interests granted access to or influence over governmental decision-making. Key aspects of political system openness to social actors relevant to our study include the diversity of political actors and institutions, such as the number of political parties, and the patterns of interaction between interest groups and political powers. Thus, we will examine how the prolonged Mexican political transition, defined by a hegemonic and consolidated party system with previous experience in integrating women into political representation, contrasts with Brazil’s political landscape, where new opposition parties emerged with uneven institutionalization and limited incorporation of women into political parties. These distinct contexts profoundly shaped the strategies and trajectories of social movements in each country.

However, we also acknowledge critiques of the POS concept, which argue that it often emphasizes structural factors and large-scale conditions while overlooking the influence of counter-movements, allied movements, and the broader public engaged in these discussions (Goldstone 2004; Abers, Silva, and Tatagiba 2018). In this article, we propose a relational historical approach that recognizes that the activities of actors are shaped not only by political institutions and opportunities arising during periods of transition, but also by the dynamic interactions among actors. Once these interactions are established, they influence subsequent actions. Furthermore, the initial conditions of political transitions, as well as the patterns that follow, are subject to evolution over time.

Focusing on the presence or absence of political struggle within the party systems of both countries enables us to examine the dynamic and reciprocal relationship between structure and agency. Although the party systems in the two countries differ, as will be demonstrated in the case analysis, it’s important to recognize that the party systems themselves evolved following the initial pattern of democratic transition. While rules undoubtedly influence the actions of political actors—something we do not dispute—in Mexico it is crucial to understand that these rules are also a product of the transition process and were shaped by the very actors operating within them. On the contrary, in Brazil, although the feminist movement sought to change the rules of the electoral system and engage with political parties, albeit with less emphasis than in Mexico, a more appealing alliance developed and was progressively reinforced with left-wing and opposition parties. This alliance, along with participatory projects, provided space for a growing and increasingly professionalized movement to operate within participatory institutions and contribute to public policy formulation processes.

Feminist movement, parties, and the state in Mexico: the centrality of a non-doctrinal pro-women political rights network and agenda

Following TGPT, the sequence of events in Mexico that led to an increasing focus on, and positive results for, women’s political representation, can be schematized in figure 1.

Figure 1.

Increasing and reinforcing process of women’s representation in México. The upward-tilted arrows represent the increasing reinforcement between context and agency that resulted in the growth of women's electoral representation in Mexico. T1 indicates the first historical event (the change in party in 2000). This event signifies the beginning of the process tracing until a result point at Time 5 (T5), which indicates the crucial advance in Mexican women’s rights due to the parity law.

Open in new tabDownload slide

Scholars unanimously position the Mexican case within what is termed a “prolonged transition,” spanning from the late 1960s to 2000 (Labastida Martín Del Campo and Leyva 2004). They describe a gradual regime change characterized by a “war of trenches” (among sociopolitical elites) between ruling groups, predominantly the PRI, and opposition parties (Schedler 2010).² Similar to other Latin American nations, Mexico witnessed a surge in social movements, organizations, and neighborhood associations striving for improved infrastructure and resource distribution in urban contexts. The devastating 1985 earthquake catalyzed social urban movements and civic engagement, prompting demands for better disaster response and government accountability. This seismic event significantly impacted the Mexican women's movement, fostering solidarity, activism, and advocacy for gender-inclusive disaster response (Tavera Fenollosa 2015).

Also, in the early 1990s, while urban movements continued to spread after the 1985 earthquake, at the rural level, the Zapatista movement emerged, particularly since 1994. Despite not explicitly aiming to influence Mexico’s democratic transition, their Chiapas uprising sparked national and international dialogue on necessary governmental changes (Inclán 2008).

During the Mexican democratic transition, amidst disputes among elites and the exhaustion of the PRI’s economic development model, a key goal was achieving party alternation from the PRI to pacify political and social conflicts. Unlike other countries, Mexico maintained electoral competition but operated within a hegemonic electoral system characterized by fraud and political rules favoring the PRI’s monopoly in representation (Casanova 1991). Consequently, movements and organizations focused on electoral accountability. Following the notorious electoral fraud of 1988, efforts were made to establish an electoral autonomous institute—the Federal Electoral Institute (Instituto Federal Electoral, IFE) and its electoral councils (Tribunal Federal Electoral, TRIFE in Spanish)—to rebuild trust among citizens and political actors. This contrasted with Brazil’s emphasis on participation in public policymaking (Isunza Vera and Gurza Lavalle 2018), leading to distinct participatory architectures and accountability regimes. It was not until 2000 that the PRI lost power for the first time in seventy years, marking Mexico–first-ever alternation of power as the National Action Party (Partido Acción Nacional, PAN) competed under new rules.

The Mexican feminist movement played a crucial role in the democratic transition (Martinez 2001), displaying significant dynamism in the 1990s. Similar to Brazil and other Latin American countries, international conferences on women and funding from international cooperation bolstered activism (Vargas 2008). In Mexico, feminists prioritized gender mainstreaming and access to elective positions in the national legislature amid the transition’s focus on party and electoral alternation:

Feminist organizations from civil society see the lack of technical and ideological preparation, … and establish a training center aimed to prepare women to take on new positions in government, and to do so with a perspective of gender equality and rights. This is the line of the Simone de Beauvoir Institute … in training women for political participation. (E7 Mexico)

… different spaces from the movement aimed to influence the structures of formal power to advance the feminist agenda. Pure feminist action, we don't give up in front of this men political big shots … we know the political opportunity was there and we couldn't overlook it. (E11 Mexico)

This period also involved “advocacy work” (E8 Mexico) and “lobbying, knowing who the key figures were and the best way to approach them” (E1 Mexico). In other words, the approach to the authorities was carried out very strategically, relying on elite networking and various forms of pressure through selected contacts.

Notably, Mexican women’s involvement with political parties differed from other regional countries (including our contrasting case of Brazil). Women established women’s party sections within two major parties since the early twentieth century: the PRI and PAN, following the Mexican Revolution in 1917 and gaining the right to vote in 1953 (Zaremberg 2013). Due the hegemonic party system’s gradual allowance of opposition representation in the Federal Congress in the 1960s (Pozas Horcasitas 2009), women within the traditional opposition party, PAN, paradoxically gained significant influence. This occurred despite substantial alliances with the Mexican Catholic Church, which did not necessarily promote an advanced feminist agenda (Bassols Barrera 2007).

During the prolonged democratic transition, the LVII Legislature (1997–2000) congresswomen played a pivotal role, noted for their diverse composition (Martinez Medina 2010). Led by these congresswomen, the Women’s Parliament (WP) was established in April 1998 to collaborate with civil society organizations and develop a legislative agenda. A bicameral commission was formed in August with ten congresswomen and nine women senators, facilitating dialogue with over 1300 activists to advocate for women's rights. This led to significant reforms, including amendments to the civil code and social security in favor of women. The subsequent legislature approved the creation of the National Institute for Women (INMUJERES) due to the WP’s influence, marking a significant achievement in advancing women's rights.

Despite the successful performance, the 2000 change of legislature (recognized by all scholars as the culminating moment of the transition) paradoxically brought a right-wing conservative party to power, conflicting with feminist doctrinal agendas (Tarrés and Zaremberg 2014). A subtle struggle ensued within the Mexican state among feminist women in legislative, executive, and judicial powers, and conservative actors at the national level. Consolidating a minimum consensus among feminist agendas within the three main political parties (Democratic Revolutionary Party (Partido de la Revolución Democrática, PRD), PRI, and PAN) became crucial during this period. As another of our woman leader interviewed related:

[after the] democratic transition, … there was a plural women’s pact where all the parties, given the context of violence against women in the country, aimed to consolidate, through legislation, the classification of femicide … and to promote the 70/30 law [quota system for women] to establish more democratic practices. (E4 Mexico)

Again, to fight for the defense of women political rights and its agenda, Mexican women and feminist politicians used all their elite networking and knowledge resources, particularly those related with strong enduring patriarchal political power:

Each one, in different areas, has contacts, which helps a lot. They also have a lot of experience in knowing when [authorities] might not follow through, they read them quickly, … they are not intimidated, nor are they afraid of anyone, far from it, they are accustomed to dealing with men of great power. (E9 Mexico)

It was a feminism from certain elites and certain sectors … after 70 years of PRI. … Mexican politics may change the labels of parties, but the male politicians are still the same dinosaurs. (E2 Mexico)

During the LVII Legislature, conservative organizations dominated the WP, advocating for doctrinal issues: against abortion and for family, moral, and religious values (CONMUJER 2000). Despite congresswomen’s efforts to employ mediation strategies, confrontation ensued, causing a shift away from political engagement among the movement’s base. This divergence is evident in the development of the General Law for Women’s Access to a Life Without Violence during the LIX Legislature (2003–2006). Contrary to previous practices, few actors, as per Tsebelis’s theory of veto players, shaped the agenda, minimizing ideological conflicts (Martinez Medina 2010). Consultations with pro-feminist associations proceeded without significant disputes.

During this period, legislative feminist congresswomen sought to counterbalance executive conservative deviations from the feminist agenda. A significant struggle emerged with the new president of INMUJERES (Espinoza 2000–2006), who had a conservative profile. To resist this influence, the Legislative Commission on Women’s Rights redirected resources away from INMUJERES to other governmental departments where pro-gender institutional activists ensured resources were utilized in a non-conservative manner. On the other hand, as the WP waned, the congresswomen’s relationship with the INMUJERES Advisory Council strengthened. Articulation between congresswomen and civil society women within the council, with whom they shared life experiences, became crucial in defending pro-gender agenda points.

This initial and paradoxical confrontations (within the WP and INMUJERES) at the beginning of the democratic change of legislature of 2000 settled a pattern of a cohesive feminist institutional activist shield with epicenter in the legislature that would be expanded to all the branches of the federal government until 2018. The second INMUJERES president, Rocío García Gaytán (2006–2012) although also from the PAN, had a progressive profile and rebuilt the relationship with the network of women activists of the legislature. Finally, the third president, Lorena Cruz Sánchez (2012–2018), from the PRI, would move away from some activist networks but maintained a positive relationship with congresswomen and senators. These struggles and reaccommodations show the growing and increasingly reinforced inter-party alliance among women politicians strongly settled in the national legislature. They continuously learned how to interweave their political decisions and strategies within a context shaped by the electoral transformation fostered by Mexico’s democratic transition.

The feminist movement focused its solidarity on consensus around non-doctrinal issues, such as women’s political rights, in a context where party alternation was central to electoral change. It was not by chance that the legislative agenda during this period was concentrated on issues related to descriptive representation and other non-doctrinal contents, such as gender mainstreaming, an assigned budget for women,³ law against gender violence and a constant and striking improvements of quota laws (Zaremberg 2009). As one of our interviewees clearly pointed out for us in 2019:

One thing was absolutely clear, and now we all have it clear also in Women in Plural [Mujeres en Plural]: we are here to advance and safeguard the political rights agenda for women … but that’s as far as it goes. We do not address issues that break this consensus. … [N]ow we have a WhatsApp chat. … If someone wants to address or activate another agenda, such as abortion, they should open a separate WhatsApp chat. This is how we operate. It’s not prohibited, of course, but there are other spaces for it. (E9 Mexico)

In this context, a robust inter-party network focused on non-doctrinal issues successfully reformed the Federal Code of Electoral Procedures (COFIPE) from the 1990s through the 2000s. Initially, the regulations in 1993 recommended greater women’s participation in political life (COFIPE Article 175, Section 3). By 2002, regulations deepened, mandating that no more than 70 percent of candidates of the same gender could be included in registration applications for deputies and senators (COFIPE Article 175-A). Penalties were imposed for non-compliance, including candidacy withdrawal. On April 14, 2008, the proportion of women’s candidacies was increased to 40 percent for proprietary positions (Article 219), with further requirements for proportional representation lists (Article 220). In 2009, 28 percent of seats were occupied by women. Specific sanctions persisted for parties failing to comply (Article 221). In 2011, another wave of reforms was proposed and achieved by the inter-party network of women politicians. In this case, the reforms included notable changes such as stricter gender quotas ensuring gender alternation in proportional representation candidate lists to prevent women from being relegated to less-competitive positions. It was also mandated that candidate formulas (primary and substitute) must be of the same gender, avoiding manipulations where women were registered as primary candidates, but their substitutes were men. The reforms also prohibited practices such as the “voluntary resignations” of female candidates to allow men to take their place after elections, a common tactic to circumvent gender quotas. They also specify clear and specific sanctions that were established for political parties that failed to comply with gender equity provisions, requiring them to adjust their registrations before approval by electoral authorities.

Together, these successive reforms clearly demonstrated a pattern of continuous learning for progress, culminating in a significant milestone toward achieving gender parity in political representation by 2019. Gender parity was obtained, not only for electoral seats but also for governmental positions in all levels (municipal, state, and federal) in a huge reform called “parity in all.” As one of our interviewees affirms “parity is one of the great achievements of the feminist movement and proof that coordination and negotiation work” (E7 Mexico). This achievement laid the groundwork for subsequently achieving parity not only in elected positions but also in all positions of power, including the executive branch, the judiciary, and at all levels of government (federal, state, and municipal), initiating an—ongoing—unprecedented process of incorporating women into decision-making roles.

Feminist movement and interaction with the political system in Brazil: beyond electoral representation

Following TGPT, the sequence of events in Brazil that led to a diminished focus and negative outcomes for women’s political representation can be schematized in figure 2.

Figure 2.

The limited focus and reinforced process of low female representation in Brazil. The downward-tilted arrows represent the reinforcement between context and agency that resulted in the low level of women’s electoral representation in Brazil. T1 indicates the begining of the historical sequence since political regime change until a result point in Time (T5) that shows poor results regarding Brazilian women’s political rights with only 17.7 percent of electoral seats ocupied by women.

Open in new tabDownload slide

The different trajectories of Brazilian women’s involvement in political parties and electoral representation have been explained through institutional variables and the characteristics of the quotas adopted. First, the open list proportional system in Brazil offers little incentives to the parties to build women candidates with electoral chances, and to women’s decision to run for election (Araújo 2010). Second, parties often fail to meet the requirement of at least 30 percent female candidates, or they evade the rule by presenting largely non-viable candidacies without facing any consequences (Htun 2003). This practice of granting leniency to parties in the legislature has persisted despite ongoing regulatory efforts by the judiciary. Third, it is important to recognize the challenge feminists face in prioritizing party activities within a multiparty system such as Brazil’s, which has twenty-nine political parties. The country has followed a unique trajectory of political parties, characterized by uneven institutionalization—with different capacities to build robust party organizations—limited popular involvement, and a continuous process of fluidity and recompositions that discouraged party choice (Araújo 2010). Although acknowledging these limits, in this article, we also aim to highlight how the characteristics of the democratic transition shaped the relationship between feminist movements and the political system and the prioritization of certain issues on their agenda.

Brazilians lived under a military dictatorship from 1964 to 1985, with severe limitations on party and political organizations. The regime established a semi-legal authoritarianism with congressional elections, but not presidential elections, and allowed for a single ruling party, the National Renewal Alliance, and a single opposition party, the MDB. Like Mexico, Brazil experienced a long-term transition based on the process of negotiation to accommodate the demands of elites, population, and social movements. But in Brazil, the transition was not just about a change of party. On the one hand, the emphasis was on regime change, particularly the reinstatement of direct executive elections at the federal, national, and subnational levels. Transition also led to the pluralization of the party system and the establishment of new parties spanning the ideological spectrum, both on the right and the left. The 1979 party reform divided the opposition to the authoritarian regime into two large portions, one welcomed by the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (Partido do Movimento Democrático Brasileiro, PMDB) and the other by the nascent Worker’s Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores, PT) (Alvarez 1990; Pinto 2003). On the other hand, the political agenda of the transition, comprising electoral and regime change, vied for attention alongside calls for widespread political and popular participation, as well as social rights, which would be at the center of the dispute in the Constituent Assembly between 1987 and 1988.

In this scenario, the representative system was neither the sole nor the most appealing option for feminist movements. Celi Pinto (2003) argues that the relationship with political parties presented feminist movements with two options: the first was the path of political representation, and the second was the strategy of occupying spaces within the political system through the creation of new participatory mechanisms, such as policy councils, and by taking on bureaucratic positions. The first path was partially chosen. The preference for political parties existed among some organizations, favoring the opposition, the PMDB, and left-wing parties—especially the PT, and to a lesser extent, the Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB) (Alvarez 1990). Without a previous tradition of integration into this political system, women capitalized on the opening of political parties during the democratic transition and the willingness to establish women’s divisions within party organizations, driven by the growing importance of the female vote. However, the feminist movement found itself largely confined to interactions with opposition political groups. Although these parties were clearly aligned with women’s demands, they struggled to fully incorporate a transformative gender agenda (Pinto 2003). Moreover, conflicts over the balance between autonomy and engagement with political institutions initially existed within the movement, even among feminists who were active in the PT during its formative years, and in the PMDB. This tension was particularly evident when the PMDB’s candidate, Tancredo Neves, was elected to the presidency of the republic by an electoral college rather than through the direct election that the movement had advocated for (Haas 2001; Pinto 2003). This conflict, to some extent, still exists among some activists:

No, I am not affiliated to a political party. I am an anarchist, thanks to life. There are many ways to be a representative. You have representatives from the ballot box to representatives through delegations. In my case, I was a representative of the feminist movement in Brazil. (I1 Brazil)

This trio of governors [Tancredo Neves, Leonel Brizola, and Franco Montoro], known for their opposition to the military regime, supported the inclusion and discussion of feminist participation in the state apparatus. However, it was not an easy conversation; the discussion within the women’s movement was very challenging. The movement itself was diverse and decentralized, comprising a wide range of autonomous groups and discussion groups with no central coordination. (I5 Brazil)

These initial difficulties in interacting with political parties were reflected in the low representation of women at the beginning of the republic. During the term in the Chamber of Deputies from 1986 to 1990, only twenty-six women were elected, representing just 5.7 percent of the House of Representatives. Among them, only one deputy came from the feminist movement, and most of the women elected were from the North and Northeast regions, rather than the Southeast, where the feminist movement was stronger (Pinto 2003).

By the 1994 election, the number of female candidates increased, with many feminists emerging from the PT, due to the space the party provided for women within its internal organization. In 1991, they secured a 30 percent quota for women in the party leadership. However, feminists within the PT were concerned that the quota law might cap female representation in leadership roles at 30 percent, and voted against it (Haas 2001). Moreover, women’s campaigns often avoided promoting a distinctly feminist agenda, given the challenges of questioning gender roles and hierarchies within political parties and in society. In the PT, for instance, women’s participation was constrained by both the labor movement and the Catholic Church, which shaped the party’s policies and upheld traditional views on women (Haas 2001).

During the 1990s, some modest progress was made in women’s political rights. The first initiative to deal with the underrepresentation came from a federal deputy, Marta Suplicy. She participated in a preparatory meeting for the Beijing Conference that was organized by the Brazilian Women’s Articulation (Articulação das Mulheres Brasileiras, AMB) when the issue of quotas came up. When the issue came before the Federal Chamber, the question of quotas was restricted to the legislature and the agreement of twenty-six women deputies, without involving a broader public debate (Marx, Borner, and Caminotti 2009; Miguel 2021). The feminist movement had minimal participation in the debate, and the law was even passed without consensus within the movement (I5 Brazil). In 1995, Law N. 9.100, introduced a candidate quota system that required that at least 20 percent of the vacancies in each party or coalition must be “reserved” for female candidates. In 1997, Law N. 9.504, extended the obligation of parties to reserve on their lists at least 30 percent of places for candidates of a distinct sex in legislative elections except to the Senate.

Despite these advancements in women’s rights, two processes reinforced each other: on one hand, women were concerned that their relationship with political parties would threaten their unity; and on the other, they were unable to implement feminist ideas and practices within these parties or increase the number of women elected (Sacchet and Rezende 2021). Given this scenario, the trajectory of the feminist movement shows that feminist attention was destined to follow the second path: interaction with the political system through public policies and participatory projects. Thus, the feminist decision to influence party programs and practices on the left, less through electoral action, but through other paths of institutional occupation, must be understood within a specific historical context, which implies a specific pattern and logic of action.

This pattern is evident in the early years of redemocratization, particularly at the national and state levels, when the feminist movement sometimes leveraged political parties to establish direct links with the executive, as seen in the creation of women’s institutions (Alvarez 1990). The promotion of state participation experiences in São Paulo and Minas Gerais by the ruling coalitions opposed to the military regime, prompted the movement—particularly forty women from the PMDB—to propose the establishment of a National Council for Women’s Rights (CNDM) to the presidential candidate Tancredo Neves.⁴

From Rio we flew straight to Belo Horizonte. Ruth Escobar [São Paulo state deputy from PMDB], in the middle of the trip, even took the microphone on the plane and said, “This flight is a historic one. Women are going to Belo Horizonte to negotiate with candidate Tancredo Neves about a public policy for women.” We had lunch with the governor, he made a commitment to the council and received the project that was presented at the time by Ruth Escobar and Jacqueline Pitanguy. (I5 Braziil)

The institution of the CNDM, in 1985, within the Ministry of Justice, with financial and administrative autonomy, represented the movement’s first achievement toward the establishment of an executive structure for articulation of gender demands. The institutional support allowed the Council to become an important locus of activists’ relationship with legislative power at the time of the constitutional reform. Despite the small number of women elected and all the institutional constraints of a National Assembly marked by a dispute between several party blocs, where progressive forces were in the minority, the feminist’s performance in the Constituent Assembly was remarkable. Their participation through the National Council enabled the formation of a female caucus and the presentation of several amendments advocating for women’s rights. Activists proposed a document titled “Letter from Brazilian women” (“Carta das mulheres brasileiras”) to be sent to the President of the National Assembly. The proposals reflected the demands of the democratic transition process with a central focus on the acquisition of public policies and social rights. Notably, none of the seven specific demands addressed political representation.

Participation in parliament was an issue …. But, at that time we wanted equal pay for equal work, to include domestic workers, there was the problem of maternity leave, maternity leave was a tough discussion, because the government wanted it, their project was to give 90 days and we, the CNDM, were the ones who won the 120. (I5 Brazil)

The relationship with the national executive via the CNDM did not survive in the 1990s. Fernando Collor, a president compromised by pursuing a neoliberal agenda of reforms, weakened the CNDM by removing its autonomy, leading to the resignation of activists from the Council. However, the path opened by democratization and constitutional principles, which not only expanded social rights but also mandated that these policies be developed with public participation, reinforced a trajectory focused on occupying spaces within the political system rather than prioritizing electoral politics. The alignment between feminists and left-wing parties was further strengthened under the democratic regime, particularly when these parties took control of local governments. Their alliances were based on a mutual dedication to participatory projects and redistributive policies, which were central to the governing approach of the PT. Public policy subsystems in Brazil gave social movements different conditions of access to these sectors and influence over them. Unlike Mexico, Brazil’s public service consists of career employees and follows a decentralized approach to public policy, creating opportunities and incentives for social movements to influence policies at various levels of the federation, beyond clientelist networks.

The opening of space to collaborate with local and national governments, as well as international organizations—primarily responsible for financing projects—brought about a notable shift in the feminist field, particularly with the professionalization of the movement and the creation of NGOs. These NGOs took on significant roles in developing social assistance policies and participatory processes, particularly in the diffusion of women’s policy councils, where they often served as representatives of civil society.

Moreover, the feminist and women’s movements diversified and pluralized their agendas and arenas of action, in the cultural, academic, and popular fields, seeking to build horizontal links with civil society to expand support for gender demands (Alvarez 1990). The influence on these themes is evident in the multiplication of women’s police stations to tackle violence, as well as in the involvement of feminists in developing technical regulations and national programs that have improved women’s access to family planning (Pinto 2003).

When the Council ended in 1989, a portion of the women’s movements began to organize themselves into non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This coincided with the United Nations designating the 1990s as the decade of major human rights conferences. During this period, these movements received support from the UN and international human rights organizations. (I4 Brazil)

The 90s were the decade of great articulations, right, and at the same time the decade of the emergence of feminist organizations. … Less articulation with the Legislative and Judiciary. Although, always maintaining very localized dialogues with a deputy, with a senator, right, that is, but they were very specific dialogues, right? In the case of the Family Planning Law, you can see the following: the rapporteur for this law was the then federal deputy. And throughout the congress we were talking to her. (I4 Brazil)

In reality, the feminist movement has perhaps … well … well, made much more efforts on the issue of violence, on the issue of sexual and reproductive rights than on the issue of political participation, right. But, the issue of political participation was very present in the feminist agenda, particularly, in the feminist agenda of women who are in academic spaces. (I4 Brazil)

This thematic diversification is still evident today in the movement’s broad agenda on women’s rights, which addresses issues such as violence, reproductive rights, racism, patriarchy, and political rights. When asked about the organizations’ agendas, the issue of quotas and political representation was mentioned by only four organizations of thirty-one interviewed. Abortion and violence were central issues for the organizations and the mobilizing element for activists, as shown by Zaremberg and Almeida (2022).

The path opened within the executive and state structures also influenced how the movement engaged with the legislature. Since democratization, the movement's relationship with the legislative branch has been increasingly mediated through NGOs, which became central to its political impact. The Center for Feminist Studies and Counseling (CFEMEA), a feminist advocacy NGO focused on the legislature since 1989, is a key example of this influence. CFEMEA was the main actor involved in the quota bill discussion in 1995 and in women’s campaigns to encourage political parties to incorporate women into elected positions (Machado 2021). In subsequent years, the links between feminists and deputies was also possible by the creation in 2009 of the office of the Special Advocate for Women (Procuradoria da Mulher), to facilitate political coordination, policy monitoring, information dissemination, and assistance in drafting bills regarding women’s rights (Zaremberg and Almeida 2022). The political impact of this development has been twofold: while this approach contributes to the dissemination of public policies and the inclusion of women's issues in political platforms, it limits access to arenas of representation through NGOs. This is due to both the restricted public engagement and the challenge of expanding the agenda without broader support from political parties and the legislature.

The long-term relationship with leftist parties and public policies at the local level ensured a point of access at the national level when the PT won the presidential election in 2002. During the PT’s administrations (2003–2016), the relationship with the national executive strengthened. Key institutional advancements included the establishment of the Special Secretariat for Women’s Policies (SPM) and the revitalization of the CNDM. The SPM played a crucial role in expanding collaboration between the government and feminist organizations to develop public policies and proliferate women's councils nationwide. Additionally, women’s institutions resumed their role as a conduit for engagement with the legislature, notably on topics such as violence, leading to the approval of the “Maria da Penha Law” in 2006, and diverse bills related to gender equality were proposed (Zaremberg and Almeida 2022).

Despite the strong connection with the executive, wherein the emphasis on party strategies and the defense of political rights takes a secondary position, it does not imply the absence of the feminist movement in the primary discussions on the subject during the analyzed period. From the SPM, campaigns were supported in Congress, such as the seminar “More Women in Power: A Question of Democracy,” in 2016 (Machado 2021). Feminists also engaged with the judiciary to challenge parties’ resistance to quotas and women’s presence. As of 2012, the Superior Electoral Court began to establish regulations to enforce compliance with quotas and prevent irregularities based on the idea that “the challenge to an elective mandate is admissible in cases of corruption, abuse of economic power and fraud” (I21 Brazil). In the 2014 elections, for the first time, the percentage of female candidates approached 30 percent. In addition to the efforts to mandate parties to implement quotas, there were endeavors to rectify the imbalance of financial resources for female candidates. The feminist movement, particularly the NGO CEPIA in collaboration with a legal clinic from FGV University, acted as amicus curiae in the Supreme Court’s ADI 5617, aimed to influence the 2015 electoral reform proposal. The STF ruled that parties must allocate a minimum of 30 percent of party funds to women’s candidacies, equal to the required percentage of candidacies (Fabris 2021). In 2018, fourteen congresswomen and the former minister of the TSE, Luciana Lóssio, petitioned the electoral tribunal to extend the 30 percent requirement to the allocation of resources from the Special Campaign Financing Fund and to the distribution of political electoral time on radio and television. These decisions significantly enhanced women candidates’ access to financial resources and time for propaganda. However, the Congress continues to pardon parties when they fail to comply with regulations.

The debate on quotas has returned to Congress, especially during political and electoral reforms (Gatto and Thomé 2023), but without substantive progress. Since 1999, 92 bills have been introduced in Congress addressing women’s representation. This high number of bills indicates a dispersion of efforts, the need for cross-party support, and a greater involvement of this agenda among women’s and feminist organizations that have not prioritized the diversity agenda in representation (Gatto and Thomé 2023). Sometimes, historical feminists—many of whom were active participants in this historical process reported here—are skeptical about the effectiveness of implementing quotas in Brazil. Among thirty-one interviewed, fifteen activists recognize that for quotas to be effective, alterations in the electoral system, candidate selection rules, and party democratization are essential.

Conversely, they indicate a prevalent concern that a substantial increase in women’s descriptive representation in Congress might bolster reactionary conservative women, potentially undermining the substantive representation of the feminist agenda.

I have always believed that quotas alone do not solve the problem. Because they can fill the numerical quotas, but it does not guarantee the quality. We do not have a qualitative advance based on statistics and numbers. (I33 Brazil)

This agenda of saying “women in power,” in a broad and unrestricted way, does nothing to change the situation of women if you do not discuss this agenda of women in power linked to a platform for feminist candidates. (I7 Brazil)

Only four feminists defended that the quota should exist even electing conservative women, while fifteen mentioned that the quota is not enough if it does not elect feminists. Beyond that, among a few activists (three) there were doubts about whether quotas would be the best path for women’s rights. When asked about the adoption of parliamentary seat quotas, an activist responded: “I think it's absurd because it would create a situation where women hold second-class seats. This would lead to an imbalance in the electoral process that is highly questionable” (I9).

These opinions seem to be changing over the years. After Dilma Rousseff’s impeachment in 2016, direct channels of interaction with the national executive closed. The mediation of feminist organizations in Congress was also made more difficult by the election of a more conservative parliament and a far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro. While traditional channels were closing, feminism was undergoing intense transformations, which Alvarez (2014) called sidestreaming: an intergenerational change, but also of organizational forms and repertoires of action. Among these transformations, we can observe the presentation of women candidates from the democratic and peripheral field in Brazil, and innovative experiences such as the promotion of new formats of candidacies called “collective candidacies” (candidaturas coletivas)⁵ or training and support initiatives for female candidates (Almeida 2024).

The network on political rights has also expanded. In 2018, after the TSE victory over financing, a network of women in Rio de Janeiro was formed to monitor parties’ compliance with the resolution and to encourage candidacies (Fabris 2021). Furthermore, in 2021, the Front for the Advancement of Women's Political Rights was formed. This Front is composed of 134 organizations and has acted directly against setbacks in the legislature (Gatto and Thomé 2023). However, the capacity to organize and coordinate these different initiatives, as well as to reach cross-party agreements, is still a point to be evaluated in the future.

These new initiatives suggest that the reinforced path of prioritizing participatory over electoral representation for women may be shifting, especially in light of the critical tension between the executive and the feminist movement’s agenda since 2016. However, these recent efforts appear to still be in their early stages, showing limited results in terms of women’s electoral representation. Brazil continues to have deeply low results regarding women’s political rights, with only 17.5 percent of seats in Congress held by women—well below the regional average of 36 percent for women in legislative positions in Latin America.

Conclusions

This article analyzes two distinct historical patterns that have emerged between feminist movements and the opportunities shaped by historical events following the democratic transitions in Mexico and Brazil. Additionally, it illustrates these historical patterns with fragments of semi-structured interviews with women politicians, leaders, and feminist activists who played central roles in this history.

Given the premises of the article, we can first highlight that in Mexico, a country deeply committed to democratic electoral transition to ensure party alternation in the executive and increase opposition in the national legislature, a conducive environment was created for feminist activists. This institutional environment led them to prioritize an electoral, non-doctrinal agenda, focused on women’s political rights. In this transition, activists established an inter-party network that spanned the ideological spectrum, encompassing both left and right. The movement successfully established women’s sections within political parties, formed a women’s caucus (the Women’s Parliament), and advanced a political rights agenda by shaping electoral rules. This strong institutional feminist movement was mostly formed by “elite” women, with knowledge resources and networking capacity with party officials, and somewhat decoupled from the movement base. As a result, women’s representation in Mexico shows striking results with high access of women not only in electoral seats but also in governmental position in municipal, state, and federal positions.

In contrast, Brazil’s democratic transition led to the emergence of new parties that lacked a long history or established women’s sections, as seen in the Mexican case. Additionally, opposition to the previous party system and regime in Brazil fostered a particularly strong alliance between left-wing parties, especially the PT, and autonomous strong movements, including the feminist movement. The significant constitutional reform in 1988, which is at the same time a product of the interaction of movements with the political system, increased the channels of influence on public policies based on a participatory project. Feminist activists seized this opportunity and, through the professionalization of NGOs, developed a broad agenda encompassing both doctrinal and non-doctrinal issues. While feminists deepened their interaction with the executive and showed limited interest in pursuing an agenda focused on women's political rights, interaction with the legislative branch was primarily done through contacts with politicians and the intermediation of NGOs and civil society. This path showed these limitations when in 2016 the virtuous relation with the executive was interrupted.

This historical analysis provides a complementary perspective to arguments focused on mainstream institutional variables, aiding in the understanding of disparate outcomes regarding access to elective positions in the congresses of Mexico and Brazil. Future research endeavors should further explore the potential connections between these historical patterns and the specific decisions that either facilitated or hindered the political rights of women in each country, in addition to analyzing how these patterns may be changing after decades of democratic transition.

Notes

Funding

For the Brazilian research, we received financial resources from the CNPq—Research Productivity Scholarship.

Conflict of interest. None declared.

Data availability

The data underlying this article cannot be publicly shared as the research relies on sensitive, personal, or identifiable information that must remain confidential.

References