Talk:Anti-gender movement

Why is "trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF)" chosen here?

The official page is titled Gender-critical feminism.
That page has a reference to the page TERF (acronym) which has the text "Trans-inclusive radical feminist blogger Viv Smythe has been credited with creating and popularizing the term in 2008", thus a term created by opposition rather than self-representation.
On the Gender-critical feminism page there is also the text.. "Claire Thurlow said that since the 2010s, there has been a shift in language from 'TERF' to 'gender critical feminism'" and "gender-critical feminism [as a] self-definition by some individuals and groups labelled TERFs".
On this page there is the text "Anti-gender rhetoric has seen increasing circulation in trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF) discourse since 2016", where given that "since the 2010s" "gender-critical feminism" has been around, there seems to be no justification for not prefering/mentioning "gender-critical feminism" here.

I'd expect that an article about a movement should prefer self-identifying labels over labels others put on them. Or at least it should mention both without preferring either. Ybllaw (talk) 12:26, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Because that is what the source says. Also Thurlow also notes they aren't actually quite the same thing and don't use quite the same discourse - thus in this situation even more reason to not reinterpret the source, where it is that very discourse that is at issue.

Thurlow:

I use ‘TERF’ as a representation of what might be called the original trans-exclusionary feminist view, which I outline in the following section, and ‘gender critical’ to represent more contemporary presentations of feminist trans-exclusion. I use ‘trans-exclusionary feminism’ as an umbrella term encompassing both. As will be discussed, the application of these terms is complex and political. They represent positions that are interconnected and often interchangeable, indistinguishable and/or contradictory.

These moves to be perceived as pro-women rather than anti-trans have created fault lines within trans-exclusionary feminism between those preferring the more uncompromising position of the past (the TERF) and those embracing an allegedly more moderate rhetoric (the gender critical).

Void if removed (talk) 12:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

It's false that Wikipedia always prefers self-chosen labels—for example the article is titled anti-abortion movements rather than pro-life. And even the subject of this exact article doesn't refer to itself as such (anti-gender movement). (t · c) buidhe 14:09, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Too much focus on Catholic Church

For something that is very prevalent in USA within the "culture wars" and after that, on global scale, "gender ideology" (and oppsotiion to it) is very tied with "anti-wokeism" and the "new right" movements and the likes of Jordan Peterson, etc, if anything conservative catholics reflects the american/new right, just like other leftists also adopt american left/liberal ("woke") politics in the current culture wars. 2800:23A8:2080:3F0:614D:8C99:4CFE:63F4 (talk) 20:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Also, I notice it has a heavy emphasis on Poland and polish politics, that should be in "Poland" section.. I really doubt 90s polish politics to be that influential globally when it comes to "gender ideology" or "anti-gender" movement. I guess this article was redacted by a polish activist opossed to the church in their country. 2800:23A8:2080:3F0:614D:8C99:4CFE:63F4 (talk) 20:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

There's an enormous amount of published material showing how the Catholic church has influenced US politics. If anything, there isn't enough coverage of this topic, so I take the opposite position. From their work with the GOP, to the rise of the conservative Supreme Court, to their key people in positions of power, from Leo to Bannon to Baier to Vance to Project 2025, all of the connections are there. Keep in mind, it's probably true that there are factions within the Catholic church, and it looks like the liberal, progressive faction has lost out to the conservative one. There's also recent research on the strategic role of Opus Dei that should be analyzed in this regard. One unusual point is that if I understand the literature correctly, most US Catholics are far more liberal than the conservative Catholic lobby groups behind the culture wars, so there's clearly a disconnect between what actual Catholics want and believe and what the more conservative, even radical elements of the church believe and want. That's a far more interesting area to explore, IMO. In other words, does the Catholic Church truly represent American Catholics? This is a question of some discussion. My personal take on all of this, is that when you look at the surveys and the polls and the data, it's obvious that US Catholics are far more liberal than the church, and in this respect, the radical conservative Catholic forces are engaging in these culture wars on purpose, because as Weyrich famously said, they can no longer win elections through the democratic process to force their fringe, Christian values on the rest of society, so they must bypass democratic mechanisms and manipulate people through scare tactics and false allegations, which form the entirety of the anti-gender movement. In other words, they can't win elections or referendums with their bad ideas, so they wage these hate campaigns instead. Viriditas (talk) 03:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)