What causes variation in gender equality, especially in female labor force participation? This paper examines French versus British imperialism and claims that the distinct policies pursued by these imperial powers still matter. Specifically, policies over land ownership, agricultural production, and laws regarding social welfare are systematically correlated with different outcomes with respect to gender. The paper evaluates this conjecture using three tests: a cross-country test of former British and French colonies, a regional test of the MENA, and a historical comparison of Syria and Iraq. The latter comparison uses Ottoman-era and colonial records to analyze how policies changed and their effects on the ground, and then uses historical process-tracing to examine under what conditions these policies were maintained or changed. Syria and Iraq are particularly useful examples of British versus French impact on gender. They shared many preexisting characteristics, especially in rural areas, but the British and French impact was for the most part exogenous to individual agriculturalists. Results indicate that, despite our understanding of British colonialism as beneficial for a variety of economic institutions (Acemoglu and Johnson 2004, La Porta et al. 2008, Lipset 1994) French institutions often better promoted gender equality, and that these institutions had long-lasting effects. In addition to adding gender as an outcome of interest to cross-national studies of colonialism, this paper also contributes to the discussion on the relative importance of imperial culture and institutions (also see Charrad 2000, Hatem 1986) relative to natural resource endowments (Nunn 2013, Sokoloff and Engerman 2000, Ross 2008).