Two questions about the phrase "gender critical"

[senua]

1. who invented the phrase?

2. do you think that it has served us well? To the untrained ear it has negative shades of "fault-finding" rather than positive "analysis".
   I have heard several references recently (enough to make me think it might be an Upcoming Thing) to the concept of "Rationality". I think that I would like to be known as a "gender rationalist".

I say gender atheist. It puts it in the realms of belief not fact.

Or sometimes substitute the word stereotype. As in “X often dresses according to feminine stereotypes”

I use Gender Abolitionist personally.
I'm not 'critical' of gender, I want to smash the concept altogether.

I always use it carefully and conditionally - for example, "my feminism aligns to some extent with gender critical views" (or with gender criticality, etc.) or "on this issue I take a gender critical stance". I'm not sure it is a clearly defined 'type' of feminism and it feels somewhat reactionary and on the back foot to me - reacting to someone else's agenda. I'm a socialist feminist and have been for decades and my feminism has always been critical of gender roles, stereotypes and power hierarchies based on sex and/or gender. It's not as if I need to spell this out, or I didn't until someone hijacked the narrative.

I would prefer a more positive term - something along the lines of 'sex-based'

The actual phrase is gender critical feminist.

People who abbreviate it either don't want to acknowledge the feminist nature of the discussion or are far right and tend to hate feminists but use our language as a fig leaf for their bigotry.

In days gone by all feminism was critical of gender stereotypes but we now have people who describe themselves as feminists but want to reinforce stereotypes. That's why the phrase evolved.

I think that I would like to be known as a "gender rationalist".

That would not get traction in the way you want because all people think they are rational.

This. Gender is harmful to everyone, especially women and girls.

I think it is extremely important to understand what gender is.

It is a lack of understanding which allows the US style false dichotomy between gender ideology and religious right wing.

I like the following graphic for a reminder of how religious conservatism has as much in common with gender ideology as it does with feminism.

Of the three groups, feminism is the only one which can liberate women from men.

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

I thought the opposite outcome actually!
I use reason to rationally to arrive at my view. Therefore the people who take the contrary view (and can never quite explain it) are [fill in the blank yourself].

I thought the opposite outcome actually! I use reason to rationally to arrive at my view. Therefore the people who take the contrary view (and can never quite explain it) are [fill in the blank yourself].

The problem is that Genderists think the same about us. Traditionalists also think they are being rational too. Each group is reasoning in a rational way from a different set of starting assumptions.

I don't disagree with you that a Scientific understanding of sex and Gender is inherently Rationalist but if I didn't think that I wouldn't hold a GCF position. I just think that as soon as it got any use it would become muddled.

For good or ill I think GCF is what we are stuck with and we should emphasise the feminist bit to avoid the meaning becoming diluted.

I think the problem with it is that it makes it sounds like it’s a niche view. Rather than a basic understanding of material reality that 99.9 % of the world has

a basic understanding of material reality that 99.9 % of the world has
But they don't seem to join the dots. If it was so basic and understandable why did Maya Forstater have to go to court to prove this view 'worthy'?

I've stopped using it as far as possible. Feminism is by default critical of gender. Also I've spoken to several people online who misunderstood 'critical' to mean 'essential' in the same way that people out of the loop misunderstand 'trans woman' to be a woman who identifies as a man.
I think the language we use needs to be clear and unambiguous enough to be understood by as many people as possible.

I don't identify with any label.

I just want sex based equality of access for females and safeguarding for children not to be radically subordinated to the inner feelings of special males.

I just identify with 'thrawn'.

If the Genderists like using the term, I try & avoid using it.

I prefer to say something like "non-believer" or "realist".

I also never call them "TRAs" now, only "Genderists" or Gender Extremists, which I feel is a better definition of that they are.

Except TERF, I'll take that & run with the TERFery so it can't be the slur they want it to be.

You are absolutely right OP, that words are important & allowing the terms we use for ourselves be guided by Genderists is putting us at a disadvantage.

Feminism is by default critical of gender

this

ive never used ‘gender critical’ to describe myself and rarely type the words unless its to ask for a definition of it depending on the thread

I just want sex based equality of access for females and safeguarding for children not to be radically subordinated to the inner feelings of special males.
Snappy!

words are important & allowing the terms we use for ourselves be guided by Genderists is putting us at a disadvantage.
How about calling ourselves "safeguarding supporters". Otherwise known as SGS (not SS!)

Would not refer to myself as GC but don't care about being grouped that way.

Using the phrase GC makes it sound like believing in science and knowing what a man and woman is, is some obscure belief. It's not. I'm just a regular person who knows what male and female is, that doesn't need a label.

I don't have a problem with gender critical if the implication is it involves critical thinking.

But it doesn't, I think, to the lay-person. It sounds like "criticising the trans people".
And why are we defining ourselves using the word 'gender' for goodness sake? It's all shades of wrong!

AFAIK the phrase began because people who agreed with feminists but didn't want to be called feminists wanted a name. I agree that using the term 'gender' is a mistake.

I don't see why gender-critical and abolitionist are incompatible. If someone says they're GC, I understand they mean they want to abolish gender. What else would it mean? It's the foil to gender-affirmative.

If someone says they're GC, I understand they mean they want to abolish gender. What else would it mean?
Have I been doing womanning wrong again?
I don't feel the need to abolish gender (I don't think, unless someone can explain otherwise) but I do want to abolish gender-stereotyping.

It doesnt describe me, yet I apparently am this, but Im not in many ways.