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

Inside Europe’s billion-dollar anti-gender movement

127 replies

BeeSouriante · 27/06/2025 13:07

https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/inside-europes-billioneuro-antigender-movement

Figured that this would be more appropriate in here rather than the anti-trans forum. It's all kinda scary, particularly with Reform burgeoning and Labour larping as diet Reform.

Inside Europe’s billion-dollar anti-gender movement

A new report reveals how groups critical of so-called gender ideology across Europe raised $1.18 billion to target abortion, sex education and LGBT...

https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/inside-europes-billioneuro-antigender-movement

OP posts:
Notmycircusnotmyotter · 27/06/2025 16:06

But what about those of us who are left leaning and support gay rights and access to abortion but see the gender movement as inherently regressive and in conflict with women's rights?

Brefugee · 27/06/2025 16:08

I'm off to a local CSD tomorrow, with my (regular) rainbow flag. It will be interesting to see where the focus is (I am not in UK, we have SelfID here)

potpourree · 27/06/2025 17:21

BeeSouriante · 27/06/2025 14:34

me: check out this article on the burgeoning threat to women and LGBTQ rights from the socially conservative / religious right, this really is something that people should be aware of

mumsnet: trans..conspiracy..trans..trans..trans..waaaa

As Judith Butler said "trans-exclusionary activists will play no part in the contemporary fight against fascism". Hell, I think they'll welcome in a return to the bad old days as long as it hurts trans people.

The only mention of "conspiracy" in this thread was summarising a point from the article you posted, OP -

Did you realise you were misattributing there or did you do it on purpose because you can't remember who's calling who a conspiracy from one post to the next?!

SternJoyousBee · 27/06/2025 23:40

potpourree · 27/06/2025 17:21

The only mention of "conspiracy" in this thread was summarising a point from the article you posted, OP -

Did you realise you were misattributing there or did you do it on purpose because you can't remember who's calling who a conspiracy from one post to the next?!

He’s not a multi tasker, don’t ask him to be able to keep track of all the nonsense he spouts on his multi threads.

LizzieSiddal · 28/06/2025 00:08

Stopped reading at “anti trans forum”.

DefineHappy · 28/06/2025 05:24

I’m happy to see the continued use of such excellent references and sources used by this OP - Wikipedia is SUCH an unbiased, relevant and reliable source of truth….

😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

ArabellaScott · 28/06/2025 06:14

Why with these conspiracy theories and Wiki links, you are spoiling us, Ambassador!

TeenToTwenties · 28/06/2025 06:21

Most GC posters on here probably don't care if a man is trans.

I do care if a TW is in women's single sex spaces.
I do care that minors are being encouraged to think their personality or sexuality means they are trans, and/or they need medical intervention.

Keep sex markers separate from gender ones.
Campaign for third spaces, not to use female ones.
Don't lie and pretend you are female when you aren't.
Embrace being a TW as a type of man.

Why is that so hard?

PermanentTemporary · 28/06/2025 06:35

Not able to sleep so spent some time following links. I can see that right-wing parties across Europe and elsewhere have leapt gratefully onto trans politics as a highly visible vehicle on which to base increased democratic success with anti democratic and homophobic aims. Having said that, there is some acknowledgment even among the academic links that there has been a democratic deficit in a progression from identifying sex as an axis of inequality (eg ‘gender mainstreaming’ - an 80s term used to promote women’s equality), towards eliminating sex as a factor in policy at all, without acknowledgement of the change - gender mainstreaming now used in articles about minority presentations outside presumed gender norms (not described or detailed).

There’s also a strong view presented that the Catholic Church is a major factor in the ‘anti gender’ movement. This appears much less true in some countries than others, though it’s not acknowledged - as an ageing history student I have noticed that knowledge of the patterns of the past in European politics are increasingly forgotten and misunderstood- eg young activists asking why there is a high number of Liberal Democrats in the west of the UK, with zero knowledge of the existence, history or political relevance of the nonconformist faiths. Certainly reading these links would make the passage this week of the further decriminalisation of abortion in the UK completely mystifying. Where an analysis prevents an understanding of events, it needs questioning.

The experience of many of us, of what feel like tattered and scarce resources for women involving a lot of queuing and patience (public toilets for example are increasingly rare post Covid, though I’m delighted to say that my local council has reopened several) being appropriated by male people for their self reported spiritual needs, while the physical reality of being female (half of all women over 35 have experienced incontinence) simply being labelled illegitimate by people who appear never to have waited for anything in their lives (see how those who dare to bait Helen Staniland on twitter claim that communal changing rooms don’t exist any more because THEIR gyms are quite clearly luxury end). It’s funny that my distress at the normalisation of transition medication and surgery resulting in increased number of very young women living with incontinence all their lives, is to me a consequence of my experience of having a female body and really quite difficult continence needs since my early 20s, but this isn’t even considered a possible political issue or something to talk about by the people writing in these links. Talking to a mainstream young man about this entire issue recently, he visibly blenched at me mentioning shit and piss (actually in relation to caring for the frail elderly in that case), though perhaps he might have seen young male activists putting bottles of piss out at public buildings to try and demand access to female resources as legitimate. The sale of genital surgery as liberation, as opposed to extreme and fetishistic body modification that is not suitable for any realistic public health system to offer and which damages female lives, is not acknowledged in these links which live only in the academic space. To me those piss protests felt exactly the same as male appropriation of any public space as a place to get their cocks out and spray urine about for their own convenience and completely under their control, ignoring anyone else’s needs or wishes completely. If a third of the female population needs fast access to accepted areas to take clothes off and pee and shit and bleed cleanly and safely, that is both a legitimate demand and simply not the same as the needs of male gender nonconforming people, who do need to see other men take action against the possibility of male on male homophobic violence in the gents. You can pee next to me should be a male slogan and seen on male politicians t shirts.

In the meantime, yes, there are too many successful right wing politicians for comfort. And where the left allows the march of commercial medicine and tries to label the reduction of legitimate resources for women as progressive, there are going to be more of them. I don’t want that.

DragonRunor · 28/06/2025 06:36

TeenToTwenties · 28/06/2025 06:21

Most GC posters on here probably don't care if a man is trans.

I do care if a TW is in women's single sex spaces.
I do care that minors are being encouraged to think their personality or sexuality means they are trans, and/or they need medical intervention.

Keep sex markers separate from gender ones.
Campaign for third spaces, not to use female ones.
Don't lie and pretend you are female when you aren't.
Embrace being a TW as a type of man.

Why is that so hard?

This exactly.

Bee doesn’t answer ‘difficult’ questions, and pointedly ignores posts which offer another argument rather than being willing to engage. It’s sad actually - many posters here would love to have a proper discussion, but Bee’s definitely not up for that - so no point in trying.

Igneococcus · 28/06/2025 07:00

A new report reveals how groups critical of so-called gender ideology across Europe raised $1.18 billion to target abortion, sex education and LGBTQ+ rights.

Dropping the ball in the first sentence, or rather in the sun-header is probably a new record.

Helleofabore · 28/06/2025 07:06

NameChangedOfc · 27/06/2025 14:37

What fresh hell is this?

Not fresh at all.

Igneococcus · 28/06/2025 07:06

There’s also a strong view presented that the Catholic Church is a major factor in the ‘anti gender’ movement.

I haven't noticed the Catholic Church being much active in the "anti gender movement" anti-abortion yes, but not seen much "anti-gender" activity. I suppose that's why the author lumps abortion and trans rights together. If the Catholic Church appears to be prevalent (in the abortion debate) this could also be because it is the one organisation that is present everywhere.

BackToLurk · 28/06/2025 07:26

Look, I know these threads are tiresome, but everyone could at least have the courtesy to read the links @BeeSouriante helpfully provides. Why, their own link to Wiki is quite clear that the ‘anti-gender movement’ and gender critical feminism are two quite different things. It’s right there. Bee is telling us about a movement that their own link says is rooted in conservatism unlike GC feminism. The downside is, of course, there will be no right wing money coming, as the piece is about a different ‘movement’. Sorry guys.

Igneococcus · 28/06/2025 07:31

The downside is, of course, there will be no right wing money coming, as the piece is about a different ‘movement’. Sorry guys.

You're just covering for Boiled and her Tunnocks habit.

DeanElderberry · 28/06/2025 08:09

The trouble with all the links is that they use the word 'gender' to refer to both gender and sex, they use LGBTQ to refer sometimes to homosexual people, sometimes to 'trans' people, sometimes to neoqueer people. So they are muddled and meaningless. Discourse thoroughly queered.

Sometimes I respond to OPs like this with the query as to where MY share of the far right money is, but this time I find myself wondering at the moral bankruptsy of anyone who imagines that those of us who argue for truth-telling, rigorous thought, accuracy of language, and for women's and children's rights, safety, and freedom, only do so because we get paid for it.

KeepTalkingBeth · 28/06/2025 08:15

Notmycircusnotmyotter · 27/06/2025 16:06

But what about those of us who are left leaning and support gay rights and access to abortion but see the gender movement as inherently regressive and in conflict with women's rights?

Bee will keep on embarrassing themself with every post until they can wrap their head around that

KeepTalkingBeth · 28/06/2025 08:27

You can pee next to me should be a male slogan and seen on male politicians t shirts.

I love this @PermanentTemporary . That is what progress and inclusion looks like.

In the meantime, yes, there are too many successful right wing politicians for comfort. And where the left allows the march of commercial medicine and tries to label the reduction of legitimate resources for women as progressive, there are going to be more of them. I don’t want that.

This. By letting gender critical women down the left has dropped the ball so badly and conceded a crucial own goal to the far right. Let's see if the price we'll all pay for that at the next UK general election will be as bad as Trump in the US.

potpourree · 28/06/2025 08:29

"Why, their own link to Wiki is quite clear that the ‘anti-gender movement’ and gender critical feminism are two quite different things. It’s right there. Bee is telling us about a movement that their own link says is rooted in conservatism unlike GC feminism"

Yes, I started writing about that but I think the Venn diagram makes it clearer - particularly for people like bee who seem not to have educated themselves about the difference between sex and gender.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 28/06/2025 08:30

What the GI's fail to realise, because they are all so self involved, is if you tear down the barriers for one they go for all. There are some ‘authentically’ awful people in this world, and the only thing keeping them in check are the boundaries set by society. If you drag down the barriers so larping men can be their ‘true selves’, then you’ll allow others to be their true selves, and some people are truly terrifying. In a dog eat dog world how long do you think a ponced up poodle will last against a rabid Doberman?

Delphin · 28/06/2025 08:43

"As Judith Butler said "trans-exclusionary activists will play no part in the contemporary fight against fascism". Hell, I think they'll welcome in a return to the bad old days as long as it hurts trans people."

And that from the figure saint of the ideological movement that is using fascist methods against its opposition. Laughable, if it weren't dangerous (to the, mostly, women at the receiving end).

https://www.openculture.com/2024/11/umberto-ecos-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html
E.g.:
"2. The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”

  1. Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
  2. The obsession with a plot. “Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged.”
  3. The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
10. Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.” 12. Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”

Umberto Eco’s List of the 14 Common Features of Fascism

Creative Commons image by Rob Bogaerts, via the National Archives in Holland One of the key questions facing both journalists and loyal oppositions these days is how do we stay honest as euphemisms and trivializations take over the discourse?

https://www.openculture.com/2024/11/umberto-ecos-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html

NoBinturongsHereMate · 28/06/2025 08:44

DeanElderberry · 28/06/2025 08:09

The trouble with all the links is that they use the word 'gender' to refer to both gender and sex, they use LGBTQ to refer sometimes to homosexual people, sometimes to 'trans' people, sometimes to neoqueer people. So they are muddled and meaningless. Discourse thoroughly queered.

Sometimes I respond to OPs like this with the query as to where MY share of the far right money is, but this time I find myself wondering at the moral bankruptsy of anyone who imagines that those of us who argue for truth-telling, rigorous thought, accuracy of language, and for women's and children's rights, safety, and freedom, only do so because we get paid for it.

Exactly. The thing that article talked about most was abortion - not anti-gender, but anti-women. It also covered same-sex marriage (sexuality, not gender). The reference to Italy was vague, but I suspect that was about their.adoption rules for same-sex couples (again that's about sexuality, not gender).

Vague language, misused language, forced teaming. All used to further the 'most persecuted' narrative by co-opting issues that are nothing to do with them.

Mmmnotsure · 28/06/2025 08:44

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 28/06/2025 08:30

What the GI's fail to realise, because they are all so self involved, is if you tear down the barriers for one they go for all. There are some ‘authentically’ awful people in this world, and the only thing keeping them in check are the boundaries set by society. If you drag down the barriers so larping men can be their ‘true selves’, then you’ll allow others to be their true selves, and some people are truly terrifying. In a dog eat dog world how long do you think a ponced up poodle will last against a rabid Doberman?

Not a new desire/risk. From Robert Bolt's A Man for all Seasons:

  • William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
  • Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
  • William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
  • Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
HPFA · 28/06/2025 08:55

There was a very good article I saw somewhere (as close as you could get to neutral) explaining how people like Chase Strangio pushed to adopt a maximalist position of how sex didn't exist and we all had to pretend that there is no such thing as a male or female person.

No one forced Stonewall and the like to adopt this. There could have been many positions that supported trans rights but didn't require everyone to pretend to believe nonsense. Check out the Truscum Reddit if you want to see what these might look like.

Until you stop whining about all the nasty supposedly right wing feminists and start adopting positions that you can ACTUALLY DEFEND RATIONALLY TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T ALREADY AGREE WITH YOU then the lives of trans people will continue to become more difficult.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 28/06/2025 09:04

Mmmnotsure · 28/06/2025 08:44

Not a new desire/risk. From Robert Bolt's A Man for all Seasons:

  • William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
  • Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
  • William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
  • Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

Oh no, I'm on the same side as Moore, does that mean I am one of the bad guys after all, I hope I don't suffer the same fate as him. 😂