Ever more doubts are being raised over the ‘transformative potential’ of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda and whether it brings us closer to realising feminist peace. Underpinning a current of WPS activism and scholarship is a radical conceptualisation of feminist peace rooted in anti-militarism, anti-capitalism, and anti-imperialism. This strand shares many commonalities with abolition feminism, yet the two literatures and movements are rarely put in conversation. While both begin from similar political commitments and analyses of the international system, they propose radically different solutions for bringing about feminist liberation. Building on this observation, we ask: (1) how would abolition feminism explain why the WPS agenda has often failed to make progress towards a radical vision of feminist peace?; and, as a corollary, (2) what does abolition feminism demand of the WPS agenda? First, using the framework of ‘reformist’ and ‘non-reformist reforms’, we argue that many WPS policies are better understood as reformist rather than transformative. Second, we argue that abolitionist thinking suggests deeper critiques of WPS than those often put forward by its anti-militarist critics, based on a broader conceptualisation of militarism. Ultimately, abolition feminism demands non-reformist, anti-carceral solutions that raise challenging questions about pathways towards feminist peace.

The scholarship seeking to explain the ineffectiveness of violence against women (VAW) laws has focused on the lack of resources or will to implement these laws. Less attention has been given to how these laws are crafted and positioned in the legal hierarchy, which may undermine them from the start. This article focuses on four cases from Central America, a region where fifty-five laws to protect women from violence were passed between 1960 and 2018, yet VAW continues. It finds that the legal positioning and language of these laws prioritize family unity while undermining women’s rights to protection; thus, these laws fail by design. The article identifies four legal placements that delay (El Salvador), undermine (Honduras), diminish (Nicaragua), or render abstract (Guatemala) the effectiveness of VAW laws in the context of penal and judicial codes. This work has direct policy implications and broader relevance beyond the cases examined here.

Sexual harassment is among the most serious forms of gender violence, and what all violent acts have in common are the many myths associated with them. Three studies were conducted to adapt a Spanish version of the Illinois Sexual Harassment Myth Acceptance (ISHMA) scale, which assesses myths about sexual harassment. The first study aimed to, for the first time, present psychometric data on the Spanish version of the ISHMA. The participants were 339 college students. After adapting the items and measuring their content validity, we examined the test’s dimensional structure, statistically analyzed the items, and determined the instrument’s reliability (α = .91 for the total scale and between .77 and .84 for the different dimensions). Study 2 involved 326 adult participants from the general population and its objective was to evaluate the scale’s dimensional structure through confirmatory factor analysis (χ2 143 = 244.860, p < .001; GFI = .952; CFI = .958; RMSEA = .034 [.026 – .041]). The third study was conducted in order to measure convergent validity in both students and adults from the general population. Differences by gender were found in all dimensions being the females’ means higher than males (Cohen´s d between .38 and .62). Our findings suggest the Spanish version of the ISHMA is a useful instrument to study myths about sexual harassment.

This paper describes the demographic, gender violence and psychopathological characteristics of 399 men in a specialized treatment programme for gender violence. Furthermore, a comparison of all the variables studied among the subjects referred by the court to the treatment programme (n = 276) and those who were imprisoned (n = 123) was conducted. The results showed the existence of numerous statistically significant differences between groups, primarily in psychopathological variables and in cognitive bias about women and violence use. In general, imprisoned batterers showed more irrational beliefs both about women and about violence as a strategy to cope with everyday difficulties. Moreover, batterers in prison had significantly higher scores on all psychopathological symptoms as assessed by SCL-90-R, as well as in most of STAXI-2 subscales. According to these results, batterers in prison showed a higher severity in variables studied than those who were referred by the court to the treatment programme. Implications of these results for further research and clinical practice are also commented on.