In 2014, the Swedish government announced its intentions to conduct an outspoken feminist foreign policy. In the years that have followed that same government have applied legislation and policy in the refugee and asylum area that are inconsistent with some aspects of that policy. The purpose of this thesis is to lay bare some of those inconsistencies. It entails a critical analysis of the Law on temporary limitations to the possibility of being granted a residence permit in Sweden (2016:752), the EU-Turkey Deal as well as the male-network criteria. By applying a feminist legal perspective in the analysis, this thesis will highlight how these laws and policies have gendered implications. The material consists of the legislation and policies in question as well as multitude of reports and statistics aimed at illustrating the consequences of the three chosen examples. The purpose is not to present a complete view of the asylum-seeking process and the laws and policies that effects it but rather to show how the examples analysed here present inconsistencies in relation to the feminist foreign policy. This thesis also places those inconsistencies in a larger context as it poses questions on both inclusion and exclusion in the Swedish feminist ‘project’ as well as places them within the narrative of criticism aimed at the one-sidedness of the wider human rights project.