Strength in Numbers

At his inauguration as prime minister, in the presence of the king, Mariano Rajoy swore his oath with his left hand on the Bible and his right on the Spanish Constitution. Did he know what text the Bible was open at? Had he been told of its content?

It was open at chapter 30 of the Book of Numbers, fourth book of the Pentateuch, which regulates vows and oaths, and in particular contains the norms relative to vows made by women. It is the faithful reflection of an ancient society in which the woman occupied a subordinate position. A vow made by a woman was subject to the authority of the male, except when she was a widow or had been repudiated - that is, when there was no man to take responsibility for her. If the woman was unmarried and the father disapproved of the vow, she could not keep it; if he approved, she had to keep it. And so on, in a series of similar points, reflecting the archaic, patriarchal structure of Near Eastern society in the times when these books were written.

These swearing-in ceremonies, with Bible and crucifix, are a leftover from Franco's "national Catholicism," and are hard to understand unless it is that the king expressly desires them. And if such are his personal beliefs, then they ought to be kept in the private sphere, not paraded in a public ceremony as relevant as the swearing-in of a prime minister and his Cabinet. It amounts to a sacralization of political activity, at odds with the state's supposedly secular character.

Alberto Ruiz-Gallardón -- "the minister who didn't love women" -- Is the transmission belt of the Catholic ideology

After 34 years of a Constitution that says "no religious confession will have an official character" (article 16.3), this article is violated on an occasion as important as the swearing-in of a government. And this has been happening since Franco's death, with every new elected, democratic government. Does the people's will need to be legitimized by God, the Bible and the crucifix?

The oath with the hand placed on the Book of Numbers -- does this mean that Rajoy's policy will go on maintaining discrimination concerning women, as he did throughout eight years in opposition, repeatedly voting against most of the gender-equality laws? The composition of his Cabinet, indeed, gave an indication of which way the wind was blowing. He has broken with the gender equality observed in Zapatero's Cabinets, returning to a resounding disparity, in which of 13 ministers only four are women.

The Popular Party (PP) is maintaining the appeal it earlier brought before the Constitutional Court against the Gender Equality Law. Concretely, the PP's appeal goes against the provision in the law that imposes gender parity in party electoral slates, so that no slate can propose more than 60 percent, or less than 40 percent, of candidates of the same sex in towns of more than 5,000 inhabitants. The PP considers that this provision restricts "the rights of persons in function of their gender."

At the head of the Justice Ministry, Rajoy has placed Alberto Ruiz-Gallardón -- "the minister who didn't love women" -- as the transmission belt of the Catholic ideology, which condemns the gender equality theory and denies women their condition of moral subjects. He is to implement the patriarchal policy of the Popular Party, which he has already begun to outline in terms of the archaic view of femininity, affirming that the freedom of motherhood is what makes women "genuinely women;" while at the same time announcing that the malformation of the fetus will not be sufficient cause for termination of pregnancy. We are looking at a real counterreformation, beginning with a denial of the rights of women.

Placing his left hand on the Bible, on a text of patriarchal ideology, Rajoy was perhaps unwittingly revealing his plans, which he so jealously guarded for so long, to legislate against sexual and reproductive rights and against the gender equality laws enacted in the two previous legislatures. What reward can Rajoy have promised Gallardón, for leading this anti-feminist counterreformation?