Marina Castillo: "My grandmother's submission pushed me to investigate the role of women during Francoism"

PalmaThe historian Marina Castillo Fuentesal (Palma, 1996) has recently obtained her doctorate with a cum laude qualification from the University of the Balearic Islands. Between the yoke and the cross. Women during the Franco dictatorship in Mallorca (1939-1975) is the title of the research she has conducted for almost six years and which has been supervised by the professors of Contemporary History David Ginard and Sebastià Serra.

Where does the interest in studying the role of women during Francoism stem from?

— It is a rather personal topic. After finishing my degree and the teaching master's, I didn't want to start working directly in a school because I thought I would burn out too quickly. That's why I opted for a doctorate, as if that wouldn't burn me out [laughs]. In this process, I was more or less clear that I wanted to do something about the Civil War or Francoism, but after talking about it with my supervisors, we ruled out some topics that are already well-studied and we detected that there was no comprehensive study on the situation of women during the dictatorship. Furthermore, there is a very intimate motivation: my grandmother. I spent many hours with her and I always remember her working outside and at home. Everyone came to eat. Everyone arrived at a different time and ate as they arrived, but none of the men cleared the table and my grandmother didn't eat until everyone had finished. I remember when I used to protest and tell her that the men could also clear the table, she would reply that "that's women's work". That contradiction – a strong woman who assumed this role – made me want to understand why it happened. In short, my grandmother's submission pushed me to investigate the role of women during Francoism.

What did you focus your research on?

— The thesis focuses on Mallorca and covers the period from 1939 to 1975, although in some aspects it extends to 1977, with the first democratic elections, to better understand the Transition.

How would you broadly define the feminine ideal promoted by Francoism?

— After the Civil War, the regime wanted to impose a homogeneous society. This implied not only repression but also the construction of an ideal model of a person. In the case of women, this model was heavily influenced by Catholicism and was based on three main functions: being a good mother, a good wife, and a homemaker. Furthermore, they were required to be feminine, kind, self-sacrificing, and always subordinate to a male figure. All of this was reinforced by pseudoscientific discourses that defended the intellectual inferiority of women and justified their need to be tutored.

How was this model pronounced?

— Everywhere. Through the regime's propaganda –press, radio, and programs like Elena Francis’–, but also through key institutions like the Sección Femenina and the Church, which played a fundamental role because it controlled about 95% of female education. This allowed this model to be instilled from a young age. But it was also transmitted within families. Some mothers, especially those who had lived through the Civil War, educated their daughters according to this ideal to avoid problems for them.

What role did the Women's Section play?

— It was a key tool of the regime. It had a very powerful hierarchical structure, with state, provincial, and local organization. The objective was to reach all women, regardless of their age or social class. In Mallorca, it had more presence in Palma and in municipalities like Inca, Manacor, and Felanitx. Local implementation depended heavily on factors such as resources, the number of affiliates, and even the involvement of delegates.

Were there differences between the rural and urban world and between different territories?

— Yes. In urban areas there was more control and repression because they were closer to the centers of power. On the other hand, in rural areas, geographical dispersion made this control difficult. Furthermore, many women in the countryside worked intensely and their priority was to survive, not to be educated. This meant that, in many cases, they remained outside the mechanisms of indoctrination. As for other territories, there was no difference, since the Regime did not allow it. There was only one Spain, which meant that there was only one language (Spanish), one ideology and one way of doing and living, the one imposed by the Regime.

And what about social class?

— It also influenced. In more affluent circles, many women were more involved with the Church, especially with Catholic Action, than with the Women's Section, because the latter had a more evident political component. Nevertheless, both institutions shared the same feminine ideal. The differences mainly arose from their public role: women in the Women's Section had greater visibility, which was not always viewed favorably by more conservative religious sectors. For example, in Port de Sóller there were more women members of Catholic Action; in contrast, in Palma there were more from the Women's Section.

How was the presence of the Women's Section and Catholic Action reconciled?

— There was a somewhat tense relationship, since, despite sharing the same feminine ideal, the Secció Femenina and the Acció Catòlica often had squabbles because they competed for the same space. The Secció Femenina had a more political and propagandistic component, with a visible presence in events and ceremonies, while the Acció Catòlica was more welfare-oriented and preferred women to play a discreet role. This generated subtle confrontations and rivalries, especially in urban environments where competition to influence young women was more evident.

What mechanisms did the Sección Femenina use to reach the population?

— He had many channels: training, social assistance, cultural activities... He also created spaces like the Círculo Cultural Medina, which offered courses, conferences, and screenings. Furthermore, he promoted initiatives like Coros y Danzas, which served to disseminate folklore within an idea of national unity. In this area, there are notable cases such as that of Montuïri, which was one of the most awarded towns in competitions during Francoism.

What was social service?

— It was a kind of female equivalent to military service. In theory, it was compulsory for single women between 15 and 35 years old without children, but in practice it depended on whether you needed certain permits: to work in the administration, to obtain a passport or a driving license. It consisted of a theoretical part –indoctrination, domestic economy– and a practical part of unpaid work in charitable institutions. It was, in short, free labor. In one of the interviews I conducted for the research, the poet Antonina Canyelles explained to me that although when she was young she had always wanted to travel and leave Mallorca, she was never able to do so because she refused to do social service, so she could never leave the island until it disappeared in 1978, among other impediments.

What role did the Círculo Cultural Medina play?

— The Círculo Cultural Medina was a cultural space created to offer activities and training to women, such as courses, conferences, and projections. It emerged because there was almost no female cultural offering outside the religious or family sphere. Furthermore, it served as a meeting place for the initiatives of the Secció Femenina, such as Coros y Danzas, which promoted folklore within the nationalist narrative of Francoism. Within this cultural circle, the figure of Matilde Mulet stood out, who worked in a bank and was known for her strong, determined, and charismatic character, which allowed her to lead a cultural space for women with a certain autonomy within the controlled context of Francoism. She wore a wedding ring without being married, a symbolic gesture that showed her independence and at the same time projected social respect, saying she wore it to free herself from 'nuisances'. The circle organized cultural activities such as conferences, concerts, and theatrical performances, but some did not always comply with the ideological line of the dictatorship, which led to warnings and problems with the Police. Despite this, Matilde Mulet continued to promote cultural training and women's participation, creating a space for personal development beyond the traditional feminine model imposed by Francoism.

Were there tensions with other religious organizations?

— Yes. Despite sharing the same feminine ideal, the Women's Section and Catholic Action often had squabbles over the public role of women. The Women's Section had a more political and propagandistic component, with a visible presence in events and ceremonies, while Catholic Action was more focused on welfare and preferred women to occupy a discreet role. This generated subtle confrontations and rivalries, especially in urban environments where competition to influence young women was more evident.

How did repression manifest itself against women?

— It was above all a psychological and social repression, both directly on them as widows of shot republicans. It is what we call sexual repression. Women who did not fit the model – the so-called 'derailed' – could end up in institutions like the Patronage for the Protection of Women. There, under the control of religious congregations, they were 're-educated'. But, in reality, they functioned as spaces of control and punishment, often without any legal basis. Young women who smoked, went out too much, got pregnant, or simply did not follow the rules could be admitted. They had not committed any crime, but they were punished nonetheless, and most of them left devastated.

When is this situation starting to change?

— From the sixties onwards, very progressively. Economic development, tourism and contact with other countries introduced new models, such as the fact that women who traveled and those who came from exile returned with different ideas. The massive entry of women into the world of work also influenced this, where they began to share experiences and became aware that many problems were common. If men hit them, if menstruation hurt them, if they had to do more or less work at home, etc. This was key in the awakening of feminist consciousness.

Does this awakening have a relationship with current feminism?

— I would say so. Current feminism draws heavily from this movement of the sixties and seventies, more so than from the Second Republic, which Francoism erased. It is also important to remember that many women who did not consider themselves feminists – like our grandmothers and mothers – also contributed to the construction of Third Wave feminism, of which we are daughters.

Is there still work to be done in this field?

— A lot. We are still starting. Not only to investigate, but also to justify why it is important to study these topics. Within academia, you often have to defend why you dedicate yourself to women's history and why you study wars and other political conflicts. That already says a lot. But precisely because of this, it is so necessary to continue investigating and explaining it.