Misplaced Pages

Talk:Gender-critical feminism

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vorpalm (talk | contribs) at 19:26, 24 November 2024 (→Radical feminism: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:26, 24 November 2024 by Vorpalm (talk | contribs) (→Radical feminism: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gender-critical feminism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 14 days 
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

ConsensusThe topic of this article is the ideology or movement known variously in reliable sources as gender-critical feminism (including abbreviated forms such as "GC", "GC feminism") or trans-exclusionary radical feminism (including abbreviated forms such as "TERF ideology", "TERFism" and similar expressions). The two main titles are equivalent. The article was split off from the article Feminist views on transgender topics where the corresponding section is titled "Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism."
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. Restarting a debate that has already been settled constitutes disruptive editing, tendentious editing, and "asking the other parent", unless consensus changes.
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconArticles for creation
WikiProject iconThis article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
Note icon
This article was accepted from this draft on 24 June 2023 by reviewer Alpha3031 (talk · contribs).
WikiProject iconAlternative views Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconFeminism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLGBTQ+ studies
WikiProject iconThis article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
WikiProject iconDiscrimination Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconGender studies Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconSexology and sexuality Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
On 31 January 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to trans-exclusionary radical feminism. The result of the discussion was no consensus.
Reference ideas for Gender-critical feminismThe following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
Section sizes
Section size for Gender-critical feminism (34 sections)
Section name Byte
count		 Section
total
(Top) 8,331 8,331
Terminology 19 6,539
Trans-exclusionary radical feminism 5,205 5,205
Gender-critical feminism 1,315 1,315
Views 62 36,300
Sex and gender 7,498 7,498
"Sex-based rights" 2,449 2,449
Socialisation and gender nonconformity 5,901 5,901
Gender transition 3,046 3,046
Intersex conditions 4,475 4,475
Sexual orientation 4,993 4,993
Conversion therapy 7,876 7,876
History 15 9,240
Early history (before 2000) 9,225 9,225
By country 126 34,509
Russia 1,067 1,067
South Korea 3,769 3,769
United Kingdom 15,240 29,174
Sex-based rights 4,678 4,678
Legal cases 9,256 9,256
United States 373 373
Analysis 16 21,827
Scholarly analysis 7,535 7,535
Relationship with the anti-gender movement 3,660 3,660
Political alliances with conservatives and the far right 9,899 9,899
Misinformation and disinformation 717 717
Controversies 21 12,628
Academic freedom 6,011 6,011
Conflicts with other feminist and pro-equality groups 5,840 5,840
Social media 756 756
See also 887 887
References 30 30
Further reading 777 777
External links 521 521
Total 131,589 131,589

An article with a similar scope?

21st century anti-trans movement in the United Kingdom appears to be attempting to cover the same ground as this article, presenting gender-critical feminism as an anti-trans movement. Sweet6970 (talk) 00:44, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

No, this article here is about TERFism in general, worldwide. Whereas that new article is about the rise of the anti-trans movement in the UK and is more similar to the article of 2020s anti-LGBTQ movement in the United States which documents the rise of the anti-LGBTQ movement in the US.
Of course there is some overlap, but also a clear distinction in the focus. Pinging @Snokalok as the author of the new article. Raladic (talk) 01:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi! My goal isn’y to cover gender critical feminism specifically, it’s to cover anti-trans sentiments in the UK - GCF is just the most common strain of anti-trans beliefs in the UK. Likewise, unlike this article, the new one focuses specifically on the United Kingdom and not worldwide. As Raladic mentioned, my goal was to make a UK counterpart to the very well written 2020s anti-LGBTQ movement in the United States article Snokalok (talk) 01:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
I have to agree with @Snokalok and @Raladic. This article is about GC feminism in general, that article is about the anti-trans movement in the UK, of which GC feminism is a large part but not the only part. I fail to see any reason why this should be concerning or presented as "rivalry" — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 11:48, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Looks like a straightforward attack page or POV fork based on a lot of OR to me. Void if removed (talk) 12:05, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
It seems well referenced to me. If you have specific concerns about POV or OR, perhaps you should enumerate them on the Talk: page once the article is more stable. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 21:00, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Without anything to support those claims, that just sounds like a rather rude WP:IDONTLIKEIT.
Your first 2 remarks may be subjective, but the accusation of OR seems completely unfounded. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 01:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
I think it differs in two significant ways
1. It's in specific
2. It describes the entirety of the anti-trans movement and not simply the subset that consider themselves gender critical.
I think it's a useful article and see no reason to merge them. HenrikHolen (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Specific to the UK* HenrikHolen (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Euphemism?

Collapsing per WP:NOTAFORUM

This sounds more like a euphemism than a real thing. In the U.S. we just call them TERFs and of course really people we might call TERFs are usually only feminist as much as necessary to justify the transphobia. But the real reason it sounds like a euphemism is that the phrase is incoherent. Who came up with the idea of gender being non-grammatical and distinct from sex? Feminists, mostly. So the phrase is sort of illogical. I've yet to hear a feminist criticism of the idea of gender. It's just trans people these kinds of people don't like. If this phrase is a real thing, someone needs to explain where these people got the idea that they are arguing a feminist criticism of the idea of gender because that's not in any way clear... 96.231.188.182 (talk) 06:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

"Gender critical feminists" is the term used by some people, especially here in the UK, and is reliably sourced as such from several references, as can be seen in the article.
Discussing whether or not the term is a euphemism is not useful here on the Talk: page (per WP:NOTAFORUM). If you have specific references to point to including such a discussion in the article, then feel free to start that conversation, with those references. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 10:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Not a euphemism

@DanielRigal: How is ‘gender-critical’ a euphemism? Vorpalm’s changes look reasonable to me. Sweet6970 (talk) 18:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

It's literally in the Gender-critical_feminism#Terminology section how the "Gender-critical feminim" as a rebranded dog-whistle of its original of "trans-exclusionary radical feminist", so it fits the definition of wikt:euphemism. Raladic (talk) 18:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Radical feminism

Even the derogatory term for g-c feminism says that this is a radical form of feminism. Therefore the sidebar for radical feminism is appropriate and I am reinstating it. 18:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC) Sweet6970 (talk) 18:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

No, we don't need to re-hash this. This is a pretense often used by people to try to justify the anti-trans nature, but is contentious as reported by reliable sources.
The two sidebars that are there are enough. Raladic (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Indeed. Nobody disputes that there are links to Radical Feminism but the GC movement has a, shall we say, fluid relationship to feminism, never mind Radical Feminism. If we look at the sidebar it includes some individuals and groups associated with the GC movement, who came to it via Radical Feminism, but not other individuals or groups who came to it via other paths. It doesn't include GC itself, under any name, which perhaps provides the strongest case for removing it. DanielRigal (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Gender critical feminism has a strong and notable tie to radical feminism. the 1979 book The Transsexual Empire was written by a radical feminist. I really can't believe anyone would try to make gender criticism somehow not related to radical feminism. Vorpalm (talk) 19:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
With a topic that is so connected to radical feminism, it would make sense to have the sidebar for radical feminism. Vorpalm (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Categories: