Populist radical right parties (PRRPs) have long been characterised as ‘men’s parties’ due to the marked gender gap among their voters, grassroots members, and leaders. However, as they become mainstreamed and normalised, their numbers of women voters and elected representatives are on the rise. While scholars have examined the mechanisms behind these trends, much less is known about the role that gender plays at the grassroots. My thesis investigates this by asking: Do the motivations and participation of PRR grassroots members vary between women and men? I address the question by looking both at the ‘supply-side’ of PRR party membership, assessing whether women and men can be distinguished by their motivations for joining, motivations for staying, and participation in party activities; and the ‘demand-side’, exploring if PRRPs adopt distinct recruitment and retention strategies depending on whether these target women or men. Specifically, I argue that women and men will vary in some aspects of their membership due to long-standing patterns of gendered political socialisation, and that these differences will be larger in more stigmatised PRRPs. To test this argument, I focus on three PRRPs which differ considerably according to the stigmatisation they are subject to: the Bharatiya Janata Party in India, the League in Italy, and the Sweden Democrats. Specifically, I draw on interviews with 82 grassroots members, original survey data from over 10,000 grassroots members, and elite interviews with 28 party officials. I find that women and men join the three PRRPs largely for the same reasons: they want to support the political agenda and ideology of their party, express their partisan loyalty, and make a difference in their society. They also stay in these parties for similar motivations: personal satisfaction, friendships, and career aspirations. Where women and men differ most, however, is in terms of their participation: in fact, women tend to participate more than men in party activities such as meetings and posting online content. Finally, as regards the demand-side of PRR party membership, I show that while recruitment is a gendered process, retention is not. These findings shed new light on an overlooked actor in research on PRRPs, namely their grassroots members; moreover, they counter some of the prevailing wisdom about women’s participation in politics.