People who are gender critical do not agree on everything. Some would want to see the same sex marriage legislation repealed, some do not. Some want the abortion act repealed some do not. Some accept gender is a different concept to sex, others do not. Some think unisex toilets are ok others do not.
Sorry this is a long post but I am just trying to work something out. On this quote above, I instinctively felt that what Princessglittery described is mislabelling, a misrepresentation of what gender critical people believe. It is often seen on social media posted by TRAs to try to get anti-homophobic, pro-choice on abortion people not to support the gender critical position. It was everywhere during the Bell and Forstater cases.
I’m trying to put my finger on it and I think the problem is in how the term GC is used - a bit too widely sometimes? because ‘GC’ properly assumes that ‘gender’ is understood to be different from ‘gender identity’ and both are rejected.
- gender is sexism, stereotypes of what is ‘feminine’ or ‘masculine’ imposed on all of our biologically sexed bodies. The patriarchy uses these stereotypes to elevate men and to subjugate women and gender non-conforming people. Goes back for millennia to promote male power.
- gender identity politics is a recent trend arising in only the last few decades, around a belief that humans can change biological sex, or not have any biological sex, or can fluidly change sex several times a week. It’s fundamentally sexist too, because it completely relies on the sex stereotypes of ‘gender’ as the basis.
So 1 and 2 are two quite different things and some people supprt 1 and not 2. Others support 2 and say they don’t support 1, because they don’t want to accept that 2 is absolutely rooted in sexist old 1.
And in my experience what is called the GC position in GC women’s circles, combines an opposition to 1 and 2 part and parcel.
In other circles (some of whom would describe themselves as conservative, whether or not also religious) people are objecting to (2) ie gender identity politics only. They might object to existing law around gender identity politics being retained, because they want to uphold sex stereotypes. Baldly that means they want masculinity to be projected solely on to men and femininity on to women. They disapprove of people who do not conform to those stereotypes.
GC feminists support gender non conformity and are anti-sexist. I feel like I shouldn’t have to change labels because of them being misapplied but maybe I’d describe my views as feminist GC. I want the GRA repealed because you can’t change sex and it’s causing safety, privacy and dignity problems for women and girls. I have campaigned for abortion rights and against discrimination and violence against women, girls and lesbians, just like so many others on here.
So yes in realistic, time bound pursuit of a defined policy goal I would happily work with (frankly) sexist organisations who actively want to impose ‘feminine’ gender roles on women (the opposite of what gender critical people believe) on those specific campaigns, but only where there is a point of common interest and only when sheer numbers of supporters are important. Then the next day I would be back campaigning against sexist policies.
I don’t know if I’ve worked this out in my own mind yet but it’s helpful to try to set it out and see how it looks written down.