Transnational 'Anti-Gender' Movements and Resistance

There's three terms in that sentence that all could do with being defined, and two verbs that could do with being evidenced.

"Mega churches" as such don't fund political activism, because US tax authorities take a dim view of churches doing that sort of thing. Similarly religious leaders who want to keep their tax exemption don't directly endorse candidates. The most direct partisan activism by churches is the "souls to the polls" GOTV effort by black churches, and they're careful not to say "vote Biden".

What you might say is that churches set out positions on particular issues, and individual believers put money into activism. "US Evangelical money" is useful to scare people with, but it's not different in kind from the old lady at your Catholic parish who makes the occasional small donation to SPUC.

"Far right" as we know is a remarkably elastic term.

There's a fair amount of money sloshing around various US conservative foundations, but I very much doubt if any of us here have seen any of it, and it's dwarfed by eg Ford Foundation funding of causes the centre left supports.

The trouble with all this "links and ties" discourse is that it really does lead you down some very weird conspiracist rabbit holes.

Thanks so much, @theilltemperedclavecinist

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/29/if-lesbian-prefers-same-sex-dates-thats-not-bigotry-desire-personal-thing

When they reclassified same sex attraction to same gender attraction, their lauding of the lesbian Alex Hammond who goes into schools on behalf of Stonewall to tell pupils all about his lesbianism, the promotion of the Cotton Ceiling Workshop.

Shall I go on?

I'm not talking about you, clearly and I have no idea what you are implying with your "closer to home".
Anyway, I'm not interested in a fight. Look into it, or don't. Just don't go round denying that there are valid reasons for people to link some aspects of the GC movement to the far right, and saying "noone ever provides evidence". Because that's just factually incorrect.

We've got nothing to do with the far right. AdamRyan. That's the thing. It just seems weird to me that people like you are insistent, without any evidence, that women like me are buddies or tools of the far right when you ought to be looking closer to home.

I can well believe Stonewall/Nancy Kelly/Mermaids saying those things. But not the "bigoted genital preference" thing. That sounds like Riley Dennis.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10225111/Stonewall-brands-lesbians-sexual-racists-raising-concerns-sex-transgender-women.html

I don't know when exactly.
So you accept all the other bits of evidence, I presume?

I'm equally surprised GC feminists don't want to distance themselves from the far right.🤷‍♀️ Maybe both sides see themselves as "open minded" and "listening to all views"?

Telling homosexual women and men that homosexuality is a bigoted genital preference (Stonewall)
When did Stonewall do this?

Err go read the KJK threads. Look at the Nat Con movement and where their money comes from.

I don't want to derail the thread, but there certainly is money coming from the American Christian Right to influence the debate on trans issues in this country. Its attemoted ideological capture, just of the far right variety.

Genderist homophobia:
Telling lesbians that men are lesbians (Stonewall)
Telling homosexual women and men that homosexuality is a bigoted genital preference (Stonewall)
Telling homosexual women that a refusal to make themselves available to men is akin to racism (Nancy Kelley of Stonewall)
Telling a girl or boy that they might be the opposite sex because they fancy people of their own sex (Sign of trans identity according to Mermaids et al.)

I didn't say it was a left/right divide. I said that gender critical people have no more in common with the far right than they do with the world in general. Whereas genderists (whether left-wing, centrist or right-wing) share several far-right beliefs.

I'm just surprised the genderists aren't making more of an effort to distance themselves from the far right if they hate them so much. But perhaps the hatred is just a pretence. Perhaps they know that they both essentially want the same thing - the subjugation of women.

Mega churches fund the US far right and the US far right funds UK GC activists.

Citation needed.

Because this nonsense keeps being trotted out and I haven't seen one jot of proof that a) they're funding "GC activists" at all, or even selected groups. Quite frankly it's fucking insulting to be told that the reason for our activism is funding from religious nutjobs rather than because we actually believe in that for which we campaign. Way to dismiss genuinely held views

Cash is always welcome.

I want notes though,Nationwide were well ticked off when I tried to pay in three grand in £2 coins.

A little bird just told me that the US far right are sending cash also. 🎉

the US far right funds UK GC activists.

@AdamRyan can you be more specific?

I'll take Morrisons Christmas Savers stamps.*

*only two hundred and forty nine days to go.

Handy venn diagram

https://deadwildroses.com/2019/10/07/handy-venn-diagrams-the-radical-feminist-position-on-gender/

All the different groups overlap in different places.

I don't think many "genderists" at all believe that Homosexuality is a Bad Thing. I think there are some people drawn to transition because of internalised homophobia but that is not the same thing at all.

Mega churches fund the US far right and the US far right funds UK GC activists. It's all a murky mess. Trying to make it fit neatly into a left/right division is a hiding to nothing. It's just worth thinking about the motivational of people who are activist on both sides because the motivations are sometimes genuine, sometimes more sinister.

Anti gender? Do they mean the people who objected to Breslow's paedophile supportive work?

Well that could explain why so many soi-disants rationalists and sceptics are taken in then. It's just another technology-based consumer choice. And since women have got equality now, what can possibly be the harm in it?

'Our shared commitment to the long feminist tradition of gender analysis prioritises the scholarship and wellbeing of the main targets of anti-gender attacks.' - LSE's statement on Jacob Breslaw.
Appropriating the feminist tradition of gender analysis, when that's what Gender Critical actually means. Eejits, but sly sneaky eejits because they're saying 'hey we're the real feminists'

I don't entirely agree with PPs that the right's insistence on gender norms leads them to reject trans identity. It depends who you are talking about. You're forgetting about homophobia. Kai Shappley's conservative Christian parents could not accept an effeminate son and transed their child. The Taliban force gay men to choose between death and transition.

Right wingers tend not to be critical of gender so people with GC beliefs only overlap with the right (and everyone else on the planet) when it comes to sex realism. Belief in sex is only framed as a belief for the purposes of the Equality Act. But that sex is binary, is immutable and fixed at conception is not an opinion, it's an obvious empirical fact about our universe.

Genderists should be worried because their beliefs - in the vital importance of Gender, that Gender is innate and that homosexuality is A Bad Thing - align so neatly with the far right.
Billionaires fund the genderist movement (eg Jon Stryker's Arcus Foundation fund Victor Madrigal-Borloz) just like mega-churches fund the US far right. It makes you wonder what the genderists' problem is with the far right, when they have so much in common.

Edited for grammar.

What @terryleather and @PermanentTemporary said.

Exactly.

I don't believe in gender identity and I can't fucking help it if most of the rest of the world, including a whole bunch of baddies, don't believe in it either.