Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Council of Europe's report on hate against LGBTI people in Europe completely misrepresents gender critical feminism

108 replies

WeeBisom · 13/12/2021 17:39

So the council of Europe wrote a report, and they don't like gender critical feminists very much. Report is here;

assembly.coe.int/LifeRay/EGA/Pdf/TextesProvisoires/2021/20210921-RisingHateLGBTI-EN.pdf

The report is really weird because they get so much of the basics wrong. The the report defines an 'anti gender' stance as "reject[ing] the notion that gender is a social construct, distinct from (biological) sex and not based on a binary." I'm not sure what the 'binary' part is supposed to mean ( I've always thought discussions of the binary is a red herring), but I DON"T reject the idea that gender is a social construct that is distinct from biological sex. So I am supposedly 'anti-gender' by being a gender critical feminist, and yet they can't even correctly describe what it is I supposedly believe.

The report then says that the gender critical movements "work to maintain unequal gender relations in the name of “tradition”, “family values”, “Christian values”, or a so-called “natural order”. Attacks on abortion, access to contraception, comprehensive sexuality education, same-sex marriage, gender, legal gender recognition, access to transition-related medical care, trans and intersex persons’ participation in sport, and ratification and implementation of the Istanbul Convention all form part of this agenda." But this seems to throw many disparate movements together. Gender critical feminists don't believe in christian values or the natural order. They aren't trying to get rid of contraception, abortion or sex education. It's like the report doesn't quite know what its target actually is.

Later on, the authors sulkily report that a self ID law failed in Spain because it didn't get a majority in Parliament despite 70 trans people undergoing hunger strike. The fault is laid at the feet of gender critical feminists " that portray trans people as a threat to society, and in particular to women, deny the identities of trans and non-binary people, suggest that they cannot be trusted to know who they are, and depict parents who are supportive of their trans children as criminals."

They then describe the UK gender critical movement:
"In the United Kingdom, anti-trans rhetoric, arguing that sex is immutable and gender identities not valid, has also been gaining baseless and concerning credibility, at the expense of both trans people’s civil liberties and women’s and children’s rights."

So wait...it's anti trans to say that sex is immutable (meaning unchanging.) But earlier, the report said that it was ANTI gender to reject that sex and gender are separate and different. Gender critical feminists say that gender could change, but sex certainly cannot. So why is it anti-trans to believe the straightforward scientific fact that human beings cannot change their sex? And we also have that weasel word 'valid' pop up. I imagine what they mean is we refuse to believe that a male declaring himself to be a woman just IS a woman in every relevant sense of the word. But that again is because of the sex/gender distinction!

They go on: "The ‘gender-critical’ movement, which wrongly portrays trans rights as posing a particular threat to cisgender women and girls, has played a significant role in this process, notably since the 2018 public consultation on updating the Gender Recognition Act 2004 for England and Wales. In parallel, trans rights organisations have faced vitriolic media campaigns, in which trans women especially are vilified and misrepresented. The gender- critical campaign – which continues to gain momentum, power and financial support – has been instrumental in creating a situation in which legal gender recognition processes still require a clinical diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and remain inaccessible to non-binary people and anyone under 18."

Most chillingly, the report has a recommendation for politicians; "Such anti-trans narratives, wrongly portraying trans rights as a threat to women and to others’ rights and insisting on binary categorisations of sex and gender that do not correspond to lived realities, are becoming increasingly pervasive in Europe. Effective criminal and anti-discrimination legislation are more crucial than ever in this context."

I don't know about you, but I'm a little insulted that gender critical feminist are supposedly this massive, evil threat and yet they can't even be bothered to work out what it is we actually believe and campaign for. I imagine that they have to keep spreading lies that we are all fundie christians or else other people will realise we are speaking perfect common sense.

For instance, they continually repeat the lie that trans rights are not a threat to women's rights. Well, if women's right encompass the right to single sex spaces, but any male gets to declare he is of the female sex then there clearly IS a clash. I don't know why they continue to deny that there is a clash here. Simply clapping their hands on their ears and going lalala there's no conflict doesn't actually make the conflict go away.!

OP posts:
AssassinatedBeauty · 13/12/2021 17:58

The guy mentioned at the top as the author is a Green Party member from Belgium, who most definitely has a political agenda on this.

What I find jarring, as well as all the bonkers claims about feminism in the UK, is the use of the term LGBTI. It shoves sexuality in with gender ideology and worse, shoves people with DSDs into the same grouping. The report then claims that people who are against "gender ideology" are against all these groups as a whole. Bizarre.

I wonder what the process is for commissioning these reports and for judging the quality and accuracy of the claims made. And for whether they represent a political viewpoint or are supposed to be neutral.

Toseland · 13/12/2021 18:01

All they’ve got is lies isn’t it? I’ve seen 4 people this week arguing that it’s feminists who want to enforce strict 1950s stereotypes. That’s where #nodebate has lead us. It’s such a mess. Everyone is arguing at cross purposes whilst a lot of sneaking in laws in the background is going on.

WeeBisom · 13/12/2021 18:19

@AssassinatedBeauty: it's a really interesting bait and switch, because you read about the repression of LGB rights (laws being passed banning same sex kissing and public) but this is bundled in with gender critical feminism as the same phenomena even though many gender critical feminists are pro LGB.

OP posts:
Artichokeleaves · 13/12/2021 18:22

Ah, the good old political resort of Making Stuff Up. Grin

No, reality isn't concerning, and no, the threat to women and children's rights is not coming from the women shouting 'hang on a minute, reality isn't concerning or unspeakable and look at the threat to women and children's rights!'.

AssassinatedBeauty · 13/12/2021 18:29

If you do a search for the terms "lesbian", "gay" and then "trans" you can see a huge disparity in the mentions of each of those terms which is interesting... In fact the use of the word lesbian as a stand along word (not part of the LGBTI acronym) occurs only a couple of times in the entire report.

AssassinatedBeauty · 13/12/2021 18:31

[quote WeeBisom]@AssassinatedBeauty: it's a really interesting bait and switch, because you read about the repression of LGB rights (laws being passed banning same sex kissing and public) but this is bundled in with gender critical feminism as the same phenomena even though many gender critical feminists are pro LGB.[/quote]

Indeed many gender critical feminists are L or B.

Artichokeleaves · 13/12/2021 18:36

In this bizarre mindset however, if you don't hold certain political beliefs you're not LGB. It's being reshaped as a political position instead of a group of diverse people with homosexuality in common.

Rather like women is now a political idea instead of a diverse group of people with biology in common.

OldCrone · 13/12/2021 18:59

There was a (short) thread about this a couple of months ago.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4369580-Debbie-Hayton-on-the-Council-of-Europe

unherd.com/2021/10/europes-war-on-sex/

Linguini · 13/12/2021 18:59

Do we need to give a shit?
How influential is this "report".

GrumpyPanda · 13/12/2021 19:15

If I may comment on this as a long-time lurker but fairly new actual poster on MN. I'm not a Brit and based outside of the UK; I also happen to be a social scientist specializing among others in Eastern Europe, so am very much aware of the debate (research and policy level) around populist movements in the region. I am afraid that - much as I share many of the views and concerns if this board - British GC feminists aren't doing themselves any favours with some of the terminology they tend to use. I am still taken aback whenever I see the phrase "gender ideology" used here to mean "gender identity ideology" or "transgender ideology". The fact is that for most of Europe, "gender ideology" is an established term in a quite different discourse just as OPs initial quote describes it - a world view of biological essentialism in which sex and gender are one and the same and gender isn't socially constructed and hence, opposing "gender ideology" is synonymous with opposing "feminazis", women's rights and LGB rights as well as the T. It's a slogan that gets used all the time by Germany's AFD as well as the loathsome clowns in Poland or the Putin stooges who rolled back domestic violence legislation (essentially decriminalizing "first time" violent abuse). Trans issues, visible as I know they have become in the British setting, are barely visible in much of the region so very few people tend to see them as a separate phenomenon. As to other countries in Western Europe, the debate I suspect is where British discourse was, say, pre-2015 - media sympathy and curiosity about the T, especially driven by the youth pages/online editions of major newspapers, by wokerati in the cultural establishment, but really nothing so far approximating the institutional power of Stonewall etc - and hence, little to no backlash so far.

All this to say that- I get where that CoE report is coming from, given that GC is essentially a fringe phenomenon for most of what it covers, where it covers it. Yes, they are getting it completely arse backwards. But also, I can see this happening again, and again, and again, and it would really help to find some different GC vocabulary because slogans like "gender woo" - which I've seen on here quite a bit, understandably - are just completely tainted outside of the British context. Not claiming I have any ready-made solution myself. Obviously for any social movement arriving at shared terms and understandings is immensely difficult. But at least a little more awareness of the problems with the existing one might be a start.

WeeBisom · 13/12/2021 19:26

Sorry for posting this, didn't realise there was a previous thread! GrumpyPanda, this is super interesting. So outside the UK if you oppose gender ideology it means being anti-feminist, anti gay and anti trans? This would explain why the report can't countenance gender critical feminism, which is only tightly focused on certain aspects of trans theory.

OP posts:
Snowdancer385 · 13/12/2021 19:28

@AssassinatedBeauty

If you do a search for the terms "lesbian", "gay" and then "trans" you can see a huge disparity in the mentions of each of those terms which is interesting... In fact the use of the word lesbian as a stand along word (not part of the LGBTI acronym) occurs only a couple of times in the entire report.
Gee, almost as if trans people are the ones most subjected to constant attacks and "debate" about their rights right now.
Snowdancer385 · 13/12/2021 19:36

@WeeBisom

Sorry for posting this, didn't realise there was a previous thread! GrumpyPanda, this is super interesting. So outside the UK if you oppose gender ideology it means being anti-feminist, anti gay and anti trans? This would explain why the report can't countenance gender critical feminism, which is only tightly focused on certain aspects of trans theory.
It means that in the UK too, "opposing gender ideology" is upholding rigid "sex-based" social categorization and segregation, i.e. gender.

It means defining womanhood by the capacity to give birth, it means ascribing great importance to reproduction (which was, coincidentally, an anti-gay talking point as well)

In fact, most of the rhetoric used against trans people are recycled talking points used against gay people, right down to vilifying the group as "sexual deviants".

Snowdancer385 · 13/12/2021 19:36

@WeeBisom

Sorry for posting this, didn't realise there was a previous thread! GrumpyPanda, this is super interesting. So outside the UK if you oppose gender ideology it means being anti-feminist, anti gay and anti trans? This would explain why the report can't countenance gender critical feminism, which is only tightly focused on certain aspects of trans theory.
It means that in the UK too, "opposing gender ideology" is upholding rigid "sex-based" social categorization and segregation, i.e. gender.

It means defining womanhood by the capacity to give birth, it means ascribing great importance to reproduction (which was, coincidentally, an anti-gay talking point as well)

In fact, most of the rhetoric used against trans people are recycled talking points used against gay people, right down to vilifying the group as "sexual deviants".

AssassinatedBeauty · 13/12/2021 19:36

@Snowdancer385 are you kidding? Across Europe rights for lesbian/gay/bi people and women generally are under direct state attack eg Poland as an obvious example. Trans people too, of course. Then there's Hungary, Bulgaria and others.

The point is that people who hate those who differ from the heterosexual sex-stereotyped norms don't only attack trans people. Which is lost in this report by the focus on trans issues above all others. It's almost as if lesbians don't exist in this report.

Rightsraptor · 13/12/2021 19:39

Anyone who is capable of writing 'the bodies of persons with wombs' can get to fuck, come back and then go beyond get to fuck till they're the teeniest, tiniest dot in the galaxy.

Snowdancer385 · 13/12/2021 19:44

"Across Europe rights for lesbian/gay/bi people and women generally are under direct state attack eg Poland as an obvious example. Trans people too, of course. Then there's Hungary, Bulgaria and others."

And guess what religious conservatives in Poland or Hungary rail against when they implement anti-LGBTQ legislation? They rail against "gender ideology", just like you.

AssassinatedBeauty · 13/12/2021 19:53

@Snowdancer385

"Across Europe rights for lesbian/gay/bi people and women generally are under direct state attack eg Poland as an obvious example. Trans people too, of course. Then there's Hungary, Bulgaria and others."

And guess what religious conservatives in Poland or Hungary rail against when they implement anti-LGBTQ legislation? They rail against "gender ideology", just like you.

Nope, they don't rail against gender ideology just like me. Not even slightly.

You don't understand the objections that feminists have against gender ideology if you think that's the case.

Artichokeleaves · 13/12/2021 19:54

In fact, most of the rhetoric used against trans people are recycled talking points used against gay people, right down to vilifying the group as "sexual deviants".

Repeating that a lot really doesn't make it true. Where were you during section 28? Because I'll tell you as an L, I've faced a damn sight more homophobia and intolerance from the gender movement than I ever faced in the 80s. It's a hell of a lot worse than 28 from where I'm standing. I want the right to be homosexual without being threatened with murder, rape and exclusion from Pride if I dare say so in public.

Retaining sex based rights does not equate to 'defining womanhood by giving birth', that's equally ridiculous. There isn't anything in that lump of hyperbole that bears any relation to actual reality.

Snowdancer385 · 13/12/2021 19:57

@Artichokeleaves This is all quite ironic to say, considering you lot campaign to reimplement Section 28 but for trans people.

Artichokeleaves · 13/12/2021 20:00

Nonsense.

Snowdancer385 · 13/12/2021 20:02

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Artichokeleaves · 13/12/2021 20:03

The objection is that female people need sexed based provision too .

They need the right to be homosexual and group themselves by sex too .

They need access to crucial resources, spaces and facilities for females who cannot access mixed sex spaces too .

Do you really want to play spot the intolerance and oppression here?

AssassinatedBeauty · 13/12/2021 20:09

@Snowdancer385

"You don't understand the objections that feminists have against gender ideology if you think that's the case."

I'm familiar with every single dishonest strawman argument you throw at trans people.

Your "objection" is that you want to uphold the rigid gender categorization as "men" and "women" and involuntary segregation based on that.

And no, I don't give a damn how "sex-based" your gender categorization is.

No, you're not familiar with gender critical feminist discussion points. You just think you are, and so simply tilting at windmills.
Snowdancer385 · 13/12/2021 20:11

"I want the right to be homosexual without being threatened with murder, rape and exclusion from Pride if I dare say so in public."

Date whoever you want, no one is going to bother to check whether or not the women you date are trans.

Just keep your unsolicited commentary on trans women's gender or sex to your own goddamn self. We don't fucking want to hear it, anymore than you'd want to hear a cishet man calling you a "dyke" or a "genetic dead end".

Which is doubly ironic, since baby-making as women's biological purpose is something your own ideology embraces now.

And yeah, if you who can't treat other LGBTQ people with basic decency and respect, then you are not fucking welcome at Pride.