Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

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
RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 28/08/2026 07:56

EdithStourton · 27/08/2026 10:59

I have heard this described as St George in retirement syndrome. You slay the big dragon, but now you're out of work, so you run around finding smaller dragons to kill, until you're chasing 6" lizards and looking a complete idiot.

I misread that as "feeding smaller dragons to kill". Is that what they're trying to do?

nicepotoftea · 28/08/2026 07:59

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 27/08/2026 20:44

Maybe I'm naive and I certainly don't know how Amnesty really works internally, but I imagine it as "old Amnesty" and "new Amnesty". My mental image is that there are a lot of people in Amnesty who are still doing still doing "old Amnesty" - the old anti-torture and prisoners of conscience stuff, mostly politically neutral, based on facts and evidence. And then there must be people doing the "new Amnesty" - the political, speculative and "most oppressed". But maybe the "new" has taken over.

I would expect research and fact checking standards to be consistent across the organisation.

This isn’t just about them having a blind spot re: trans issues.

The report implied that Ruth Hunt and Dawn Butler are members of a right wing anti abortion group. I mean they might be secret double agents, but shouldn’t that at least raise questions? It’s just so sloppy.

Sadly I think they lack the internal processes and standards that are necessary for their work to be credible.

They say they are investigating what went wrong, so maybe there will be improvements, but if the author of the report is still representing Amnesty, it’s difficult to believe that they care.

EdithStourton · 28/08/2026 08:32

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 28/08/2026 07:56

I misread that as "feeding smaller dragons to kill". Is that what they're trying to do?

Edited

Possibly.
At this stage I put nothing past them.

teawamutu · 28/08/2026 08:58

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 27/08/2026 20:44

Maybe I'm naive and I certainly don't know how Amnesty really works internally, but I imagine it as "old Amnesty" and "new Amnesty". My mental image is that there are a lot of people in Amnesty who are still doing still doing "old Amnesty" - the old anti-torture and prisoners of conscience stuff, mostly politically neutral, based on facts and evidence. And then there must be people doing the "new Amnesty" - the political, speculative and "most oppressed". But maybe the "new" has taken over.

Like the Greens. There's still plenty of old-style environmental campaigners who work very hard to try to educate the public on climate change and make a difference in their communities.

And then there's the Walter Titty fan club, with blue hair and Trans Rights for Palestine and environment? What environment?

And they're in charge.

lcakethereforeIam · 28/08/2026 09:57

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 28/08/2026 07:56

I misread that as "feeding smaller dragons to kill". Is that what they're trying to do?

Edited

Isn't that what the Southern Poverty Law Centre did re. the KluKluxKlan? So I wouldn't put it past any of them.

BlackForestCake · 28/08/2026 20:54

My mental image is that there are a lot of people in Amnesty who are still doing still doing "old Amnesty" - the old anti-torture and prisoners of conscience stuff, mostly politically neutral, based on facts and evidence. And then there must be people doing the "new Amnesty" - the political, speculative and "most oppressed".

Yes. Amnesty was not historically about supporting causes, it was for human rights – the right of anyone to speak out freely, whatever it was about, if they did it peacefully.

Famously they wouldn't campaign for Nelson Mandela because he supported armed struggle.

Amnesty's national organisations also traditionally didn't campaign about issues in their own country, believing that would make them politically partisan. When did that change?

New posts on this thread. Refresh page