Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK says Amnesty who claim over 50% are Gender Critical groups

956 replies

IwantToRetire · 09/07/2026 17:01

Quote:

Anti-rights actors seek a society in which women and men have fixed and distinct roles, based on what they view as ‘natural’ and ‘traditional’. These actors perceive the idea that gender is socially constructed as a threat because it suggests that gender roles can, and do, change across societies and over time. In fact, progress in the rights of women and LGBT+ people has been underpinned by changing understandings of gender and social roles.

Anti-rights actors refer to this perceived threat as ‘gender ideology’, portraying it as an attack on national traditions, family structures, marriage and religious freedom. These narratives often seek to generate fear and uncertainty and rely on misinformation or exaggerated claims.

The term ‘gender ideology’ emerged in the context of debates within international institutions, particularly the United Nations, about gender equality and sexual and reproductive rights.

In 1964, the Holy See became a Permanent Observer at the UN General Assembly, the only religious body with this status. As a permanent observer the Holy See can participate in processes at the General Assembly as well as other UN bodies. It cannot vote but it has the possibility to co-sponsor resolutions if a member state requests a vote. Although it cannot vote, the Holy See can participate in UN discussions and processes and has played an influential role in debates on women's rights and LGBT+ rights.

The term ‘gender ideology’ gained prominence in response to progress on gender equality and Cairo in 1994. These conference were a landmark moment for the global women's rights movement. The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action is widely regarded as a key international framework for advancing women's rights and gender equality, and states continue to report on its implementation through the Commission on the Status of Women.

While opposition to sexual and reproductive rights predates the Beijing conference, the term ‘gender ideology’ became a particularly important response to the advances achieved there. The phrase was coined to explain the growing influence of gender equality agendas and to mobilise opposition to them.

Although the term originated in debates at the international level, it has since become a broad political narrative used by a wide range of anti-rights actors. Today, it is often used to connect campaigns against gender equality, sexual and reproductive rights, and LGBT+ rights across different countries and contexts.

From intro to report at
https://media.amnesty.org.uk/documents/Report_-_A_growing_threat__the_anti-rights_movement_in_the_UK_July_2026.pdf

See images of the list of 51 groups Amnesty is claiming are right wing.

A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK says Amnesty who claim over 50% are Gender Critical groups
A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK says Amnesty who claim over 50% are Gender Critical groups
OP posts:
Thread gallery
84
nicepotoftea · 27/08/2026 10:14

ProfessorBinturong · 27/08/2026 08:14

What is the likelihood of them allowing questions from the Liberal Voice for Women?

I would love it if Tim Farron turned up and asked why she thinks the all party parliamentary Christian group he chairs is 'anti-rights'.

nicepotoftea · 27/08/2026 10:05

moto748e · 27/08/2026 09:44

They've already got that, surely. And the grand-daughter of the founder saying she wouldn't give them a penny wasn't a good look either.

Yes, but there is a difference between rolling your eyes because they share a stupid meme and believing that they are fundamentally incompetent.

I was listening to a podcast about Syria and Assad recently and Amnesty were mentioned as one of the credible organisations reporting on torture.

Would they be credible now?

MarieDeGournay · 27/08/2026 10:01

DrBlackbird · 27/08/2026 09:53

Apology received by Trans Widows Voices and Children of Transitioners. We note their refusal to set out their methodology.

Still insisting they support the rights of women and girls and trans people. You would think that a human rights organisation might be aware that some rights conflict and that they’d need to reflect on this to develop a reasonable position when that happens.

Yes - and insisting at the end of all these apology letters that transpeople are 'marginalised' - that's the flaw at the centre of AmnestyUK's and others' obsession with the trans issue: they have declared transpeople as marginalised, and committed themselves to fighting for trans rights, without ever explaining what that 'marginalisation' consists of, and what rights trans people do not already have.

'Being marginalised' is a example of the big factual voids at the centre of trangenderism, the biggest one being that humans can't change their sex, so what exactly is 'transitioning' anyway??

A house built on sand.

DrBlackbird · 27/08/2026 09:53

Apology received by Trans Widows Voices and Children of Transitioners. We note their refusal to set out their methodology.

Still insisting they support the rights of women and girls and trans people. You would think that a human rights organisation might be aware that some rights conflict and that they’d need to reflect on this to develop a reasonable position when that happens.

moto748e · 27/08/2026 09:44

They've already got that, surely. And the grand-daughter of the founder saying she wouldn't give them a penny wasn't a good look either.

nicepotoftea · 27/08/2026 08:32

I wonder if she will actually speak?

Leaving aside the subject of the report, Amnesty have agreed that it was inaccurate and low quality.

Aren’t they risking reputational damage?

ProfessorBinturong · 27/08/2026 08:14

What is the likelihood of them allowing questions from the Liberal Voice for Women?

OP posts:
selffellatingouroborosofhate · 21/08/2026 16:08

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 28/07/2026 14:23

I have long held that any organisation that gets what it started out campaigning for is then out of a job, so it will hunt about for new things to campaign about (I first noticed this with CAMRA). It was brutally obvious when Stonewall UK got legal marriage for gay couples and lesbian couples and at once started to hunt for a new cause, landing on trans rights for lack of anything else.

This is not true for Amnesty, of course, because they have not by any means achieved their aims, but maybe they have realised they were never going to get everyone in the world to be nice to each other and so went for something they assumed would be easier to manage?

Chiara Caparo used to campaign for women, and for children, but since about 2016 she's been less focussed on real issues and more inclined to bang on about trans people's illusory rights to everyone else's everything, silly woman.

This is also true for trade unions. They are nominally socialist, but if we actually achieved any form of collective ownership of the means of production, all the head office staff would be out of a job. Without employers, there's no need for a collective bargaining organisation to represent the workforce.

This is why, despite many Unite members being far-left, the recent General Secretary election was slightly-left versus not-actually-left.

BlackForestCake · 21/08/2026 00:50

Some idiots on BSky are trying to reshare the deleted report, thinking that they're getting “the truth they tried to ban!” out, not understanding that they’re only exposing Amnesty to a greater risk of being sued.

SwirlyGates · 20/08/2026 09:23

RedToothBrush · 20/08/2026 09:13

Starmer was a Human Rights Specialist initially.

I thought Starmer would make a great PM with his background as a lawyer. How wrong I was. Maybe with hindsight it was a contribution to him never having a firm line or strong opinion on anything.

RedToothBrush · 20/08/2026 09:13

woollyhatter · 20/08/2026 08:42

My wife made an interesting observation that there are some subjects in the law that were on the surface very attractive to students but lots tended to do badly in it. She mentioned human rights law. Sounds fluffy but a massively technical black letter subject.

Lots of people did badly in it. I can’t help but speculate whether those folk with law degrees ended up in the third sector and with their flawed understanding have got us to this place. Bar room lawyering in the charitable sector. Of course I have only personal evidence for this and total anecdata but I can’t help wonder.

Starmer was a Human Rights Specialist initially.

woollyhatter · 20/08/2026 08:42

My wife made an interesting observation that there are some subjects in the law that were on the surface very attractive to students but lots tended to do badly in it. She mentioned human rights law. Sounds fluffy but a massively technical black letter subject.

Lots of people did badly in it. I can’t help but speculate whether those folk with law degrees ended up in the third sector and with their flawed understanding have got us to this place. Bar room lawyering in the charitable sector. Of course I have only personal evidence for this and total anecdata but I can’t help wonder.

IwantToRetire · 19/08/2026 22:16

Igneococcus · 19/08/2026 21:52

Just saw this comment in the Times "Amnesty v JK Rowling points to wider malaise":
https://www.thetimes.com/article/9a786952-f7dc-41e0-a059-c3a295b25ae3?shareToken=1e40dfa3fd670b8ce4e0c4a41ff759ac&ver=article

Have archived this as I think share tokens expire after ..... ?

https://archive.is/7Hqph

OP posts:
SwirlyGates · 01/08/2026 15:13

"We made a mistake in publishing" = "We think this but we shouldn't have told you we think it".

There is stuff further down saying "[this] does not represent our institutional position", but they lead with the above. Anyway, we know their institutional position as it's been evident for some time, and the publication of their views was no real surprise.

nicepotoftea · 01/08/2026 15:07

TinselAngel · 01/08/2026 08:20

Apology received by Trans Widows Voices and Children of Transitioners. We note their refusal to set out their methodology.

"We agree it is important to learn from this moment"

One wonders what they think they will be able to learn that they shouldn't have known already.

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 01/08/2026 14:41

I don't see any sign that they have understood just how offensive they have been.

And they haven't acknowledged their own anti-[women's-]rights stance which led to these reports being written and put on their website.

And they have not admitted that they did publicise the reports, despite their recent denial.

UtopiaPlanitia · 01/08/2026 14:35

TinselAngel · 01/08/2026 08:20

Apology received by Trans Widows Voices and Children of Transitioners. We note their refusal to set out their methodology.

Ridiculously generic letter from Amnesty - they really think we're all idiots to put up with their total lack of concern for what they've done in smearing GC groups.

Shedmistress · 01/08/2026 13:28

They say it was a 'mistake' but they have been running thie line for a few years now.

Someone at the top has signed off on the funding to keep doing this. Someone is letting the Gender Director carry on so this cannot end in just a 'sorry not sorry'.

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 01/08/2026 13:22

nicepotoftea · 01/08/2026 13:11

Is it implied that the review will be made public?

I wonder how much Amnesty's reputation is damaged by this?

Leaving aside the subject of the report, as a piece of research it would be embarrassing if it were handed in as a KS3 Project.

If they can be so wrong about this (and I am including their implied assertion that Ruth Hunt is a member of an anti-trans conspiracy) what else are they wrong on?

They don't say and I expect they'll try to keep the review under wraps as much as they can but I also expect that JKR, FWS, MBM etc. will be taking a close interest in who's doing it, what it covers, who can see it, and what it says.

🍿

Ereshkigalangcleg · 01/08/2026 13:21

TinselAngel · 01/08/2026 08:20

Apology received by Trans Widows Voices and Children of Transitioners. We note their refusal to set out their methodology.

“We’re not telling you but we promise we’ll never use it again”

Ereshkigalangcleg · 01/08/2026 13:19

If it’s made available to the organisations affected I imagine it will become public.

nicepotoftea · 01/08/2026 13:11

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 01/08/2026 09:43

“We will commission an independent external review"

Promised in AI's apology to Transwidows Voices / COTs and the apology- for- apologising.

Wasn't an independent external review one of the conditions that Beira's Place demanded? And possibly the most important one. Heads may roll at AI. Or at some senior people may be quietly edged out.

Is it implied that the review will be made public?

I wonder how much Amnesty's reputation is damaged by this?

Leaving aside the subject of the report, as a piece of research it would be embarrassing if it were handed in as a KS3 Project.

If they can be so wrong about this (and I am including their implied assertion that Ruth Hunt is a member of an anti-trans conspiracy) what else are they wrong on?