What Does Gender Critical Mean?
15 minute read
PIcture courtesy of The New Backlash: 15. Conclusion: moving forward via Gender Critical Dad
What does Gender Critical Mean?
Gender critical is mainly used to describe people who believe that sex is “real and immutable” but also means to be critical of gender stereotypes and expectations that women or men should conform to these:
There are 2 sexes, male and female.
Sex cannot be changed.
Biological sex matters but does not determine what you like or what you can do
I suspect that most of the population believe in the scientific fact of there being only 2 sexes and know that this is true of all mammals not just humans.
Naomi Cunningham suggests the term Sex-realist better describes this position, versus Sex-Denialist (those who believe that the inner feeling of being a man or a woman (or somewhere in between) takes precedence over someone’s biological sex).
I was about 18 months into exploring issues around gender self-identification before I came across the term Gender Critical and realised that term probably describes me, and most people I know. It isn’t a specific movement or group, and as with the sex-denialists / believers in gender ideology not all gender critical people have exactly the same beliefs but at the core is the belief that there are 2 sexes.
Being Gender Critical is not a political position, the majority of people I have come across are from the left but are disillusioned by the refusal of the left (Labour, Liberal & Green Party in England) to acknowledge any conflict with women’s rights and gender ideology. There are also social conservatives who are described as being gender critical, particularly in the USA, but who have very different beliefs in terms of women’s rights in general and perhaps do believe women and men should conform to gender stereotypes (eg women should be feminine, men should be masculine, women should be submissive, caring and nurturing, men should be strong and assertive).
Of the work I have read by gender critical feminists, the gender critical YouTube videos I have watched, podcasts I have listened to and people I have interacted with on-line the views are not extremist, they do not wish harm to anyone who identifies as trans, do not want trans people discriminated against for being trans, and want them to be protected from harassment and abuse. What they do want is an open discussion about the conflict of rights and the harms and myths perpetuated by Gender Ideology.
Gender Critical Feminists are opposed to gendered expectations and norms, we acknowledge that women can be ‘masculine’ and men ‘feminine’ and that this doesn’t make them less of a man or less of a woman: Being a man or woman is determined by biology but this is not an ‘essentialist’ or ‘determinist’ stance as some claim; a person is more than their biological sex but this is a part of who we are. Gender Critical Feminists believe children should be allowed to play with what they like; there are no ‘boys toys’ or ‘girls toys’. Research has consistently shown that most gender non-conforming children grow up to be gay or lesbian.
Gay and Lesbians are well represented among those with Gender Critical views; Dennis Kavanagh and Clive Simpson host a regular Gender Critical podcast from their perspective as gay men, the LGB Alliance was set up by Bev Jackson and Kate Harris, two lesbian women concerned that Stonewall no longer represented the needs of same sex attracted people. The LGB Alliance is clear on its belief in the binary nature of sex.
Gender Critical is often taken to be synonymous with transphobia, if we take the Cambridge Dictionary definition this means a fear or dislike of transgender or non-binary people however there are many trans people who are gender critical. They are often referred to as ‘Truscum’ or accused of being transphobic themselves because they acknowledge that there are 2 sexes and the reason they transitioned was because they feel more comfortable presenting as the opposite sex due to the extreme gender dysphoria they suffered.
Some gender critical trans people are Blaire White, Buck Angel, Marcus Dib , Aaron Kimberly , Aaron Terrell, Miranda Yardley, Jenn Smith, and Corinna Cohen but there are many more who are speaking out against the tenets of gender ideology.
Legal Protection for Gender Critical Views:
People have lost their jobs over stating that they believe there are 2 sexes, and that sex is immutable (can’t be changed). This belief is now protected in law thanks to the case of Maya Forstater:
In 2018 Maya Forstater had some discussions on her personal twitter about the proposed reforms to the GRA 2004 and the potential impact on women and children. Maya’s tweets are available here. Maya was investigated after complaints were made about her tweets, subsequently her contract with a global think tank was not renewed.
Maya took the Centre for Global Development to an Employment Tribunal for discrimination against her based on her belief. In December 2019 the judge found that the belief that there are 2 sexes and sex cannot be changed did not meet the test for a belief under the Equality Act 2010: The judge did not agree that Maya’s gender critical beliefs were worthy of respect in a democratic society. (Full judgement here)
You can read more about Maya’s case and beliefs at https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/lost-job-speaking-out/ and https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stand-with-maya/
Following the judgement in December 2019 Maya took her case to the Employment Appeal Tribunal:
In June 2021 the judgement was made that gender critical beliefs do come under the protection of the Equality Act 2010. The EAT noted that this does not mean that people with this belief can “’misgender’ trans people with impunity” and that whether mis-gendering constitutes harassment would need to be decided at a tribunal for a given case. This case sets a legal precedent as it was an EAT (Employment Appeal Tribunal).
Gender Critical Beliefs Protected under this judgement:
Paragraph 50 of the EAT judgement refers to Paragraph 77 and Paragraphs 39-41 of the original judgement in defining the beliefs in question:
77. The core of the Claimant's belief is that sex is biologically immutable. There are only two sexes, male and female. She considers this is a material reality. Men are adult males. Women are adult females. There is no possibility of any sex in between male and female; or that is a person is neither male nor female. It is impossible to change sex. Males are people with the type of body which, if all things are working, are able to produce male gametes (sperm). Females have the type of body which, if all things are working, is able to produce female gametes (ova), and gestate a pregnancy. It is sex that is fundamentally important, rather than “gender”, “gender identity” or “gender expression”. She will not accept in any circumstances that a trans woman is in reality a woman or that a trans man is a man. That is the belief that the Claimant holds.
39. In the Claimant witness statement she stated:
39.1 “I believe that people deserve respect, but ideas do not.” Para 5
39.2 “I do not believe it is incompatible to recognise that human beings cannot change sex whilst also protecting the human rights of people who identify as transgender” Para 13
39.3 "I believe that there are only two sexes in human beings (and indeed in all mammals): male and female. This is fundamentally linked to reproductive biology. Males are people with the type of body which, if all things are working, are able to produce male gametes (sperm).
Females have the type of body which, if all things are working, is able to produce female gametes (ova), and gestate a pregnancy.” Para 14
39.4 “Women are adult human females. Men are adult human males.” Para 15
39.5 “Sex is determined at conception, through the inheritance (or not) of a working copy of a piece of genetic code which comes from the father (generally, apart from in very rare cases, carried on the Y chromosome).” Para 16
39.6 “Some women have conditions which mean that they do not produce ova or cannot conceive or sustain a pregnancy. Similarly, some men are unable to produce viable sperm. These people are still women and men.” Para 17
39.7 “I believe that it is impossible to change sex or to lose your sex. Girls grow up to be women. Boys grow up to be men. No change of clothes or hairstyle, no plastic surgery, no accident or illness, no course of hormones, no force of will or social conditioning, no declaration can turn a female person into a male, or a male person into a female.” Para 23
39.8 “Losing reproductive organs or hormone levels through illness or surgery does not stop someone being a woman or a man.” Para 24
39.9 “A person may declare that they identify as (or even are) a member of the opposite sex (or both, or neither) and ask others to go along with this. This does not change their actual sex.” Para 26
39.10 “There are still areas of scientific discovery about the pathways of sexual development, including chromosomal and other “disorders of sexual development” (so called “intersex” conditions), and about the psychological factors underlying transgender identification and gender dysphoria. However I do not believe that any such research will disprove the basic reality that there are two sexes” Para 60
39.11 “Under the Gender Recognition Act 2004, a person may change their legal sex. However this does not give them the right to access services and spaces intended for members of the opposite sex. It is an offence for a person who has acquired information in an official capacity about a person’s GRC to disclose that information.
However this situation where a person’s sex is protected information relates to a minority of cases where a person has a GRC, is successfully “passing” in their new identity and is not open about being trans. In many cases people can identify a person’s sex on sight, or they may have known the person before transition, or the person may have made it public information that they are trans. There is no general legal compulsion for people not to believe their own eyes or to forget, or pretend to forget, what they already know, or which is already in the public domain.” Para 108
39.12 “In most social situations we treat people according to the sex they appear to be. And even when it is apparent that someone’s sex is different from the gender they seek to portray through their clothing, hairstyle, voice and mannerisms, or the name, title and pronoun they ask to be referred to by, it may be polite or kind to pretend not to notice, or to go along with their wish to be referred to in a particular way. But there is no fundamental right to compel people to be polite or kind in every situation.” Para 110
39.13 “In particular while it may be disappointing or upsetting to some male people who identify as women to be told that it is not appropriate for them to share female-only services and spaces, avoiding upsetting males is not a reason to compromise women’s safety, dignity and ability to control their own boundaries as to who gets to see and touch their bodies.”
40. I accept that these passages reflect core aspects of the Claimant’s belief.
41. When questioned during live evidence the Claimant stated that biological males cannot be women. She considers that if a trans woman says she is a woman that is untrue, even if she has a Gender Recognition Certificate. On the totality of the Claimant’s evidence it was clear that she considers there are two sexes, male and female, there is no spectrum in sex and there are no circumstances whatsoever in which a person can change from one sex to another, or to being of neither sex.
She would generally seek to be polite to trans persons and would usually seek to respect their choice of pronoun but would not feel bound to; mainly if a trans person who was not assigned female at birth was in a “woman’s space”, but also more generally. If a person has a Gender Recognition Certificate this would not alter the Claimant’s position. The Claimant made it clear that her view is that the words man and woman describe a person’s sex and are immutable. A person is either one or the other, there is nothing in between and it is impossible to change form one sex to the other.
Once the decision was made in June 2021 that gender critical beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010 a further Employment Tribunal was held to determine if Maya had been discriminated against by her employer on the basis of these beliefs. The full case was heard in March 2022 and the judgement handed down in July 2022 with the employer being found guilty of discrimination and victimisation.
This was a landmark judgement; many others have lost employment for stating that they believe that there are two sexes and sex can’t be changed and there are ongoing lawsuits and tribunals.
Lawsuits and Abuse of Gender Critical People:
Kathleen Stock, a philosophy professor resigned from her position at the University of Sussex after accusations of transphobia led to a campaign of intimidation and a lack of support from her colleagues. (https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/nov/03/kathleen-stock-says-she-quit-university-post-over-medieval-ostracism)
Rachel Meade, a Social Worker, made some posts on her private Facebook page relating to the proposal to change the GRA 2004 to include Gender Self ID. In 2020 an ex-colleague and someone Rachel thought was a friend made a complaint to Social Work England that her posts over a 2-year period were ‘transphobic’. Rachel was sanctioned by SWE in July 2021 and because of that sanction was suspended by her employer, Westminster City Council, who started disciplinary proceedings. Rachel fundraised to be able to take SWE and WCC to an employment tribunal for discrimination against her due to her gender critical beliefs.
SWE called a fitness to practice hearing and set a date for October 2022; they discontinued this after deciding there was no case for Rachel to answer. Rachel’s legal response to this is available here. The ET case is currently scheduled for July 2023 with the Case Management hearing due on 11 April 2023. The public advice on the merits of the case by Rachel’s barrister is available here and case updates are on the Crowdfunding page.
James Esses - was a criminal barrister, volunteered as a counsellor with ChildLine for 6 years and was 3 years into a 5-year MSc to become a therapist. James was counselling a growing number of children at younger and younger ages who were struggling with gender dysphoria, so he began reading about it. James was shocked by what he found about the impacts of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries, and the efforts to criminalise explorative therapy by defining it as ‘conversion therapy’.
James raised his concerns with the UKCP (UK Council of Psychotherapists) about the lack of discussion around the treatment of gender dysphoria in children. James was warned by the UKCP that he would need to abide by their ethical framework if he wished to apply for full membership. (The Times, 20 October 2022). In May 2021 James started a petition calling for the government to “Safeguard evidence-based therapy for children struggling with gender dysphoria”. James was ejected from his course with the Metanoia Institute and from his position with ChildLine. James is taking both UKCP and Metanoia to an Employment Tribunal, a preliminary hearing took place in June 2022, the full hearing will take place sometime in 2023.
Jo Phoenix - A Professor of Criminology at the Open University, has focused on researching sex, gender and justice over the last 20 years. Jo was harassed and bullied at work for her gender critical beliefs, she was vilified and labelled a transphobe by her colleagues. Jo is taking the OU to an Employment Tribunal for failing to protect her from discrimination, harassment and for failing to protect academic freedom.
Jo resigned from the OU in December 2021 after they failed to take any action regarding Jo’s complaints of harassment and bullying and is now working at the University of Reading. Jo’s ET is set for October 2023.
Allison Bailey - A barrister who, in September 2019, tweeted her concerns relating to the stance of Stonewall towards lesbians, including employing Morgan Page who had held a workshop for trans-women on ‘overcoming the cotton ceiling’ (cotton ceiling being a euphemism for lesbian’s pants). Allison was also concerned about Stonewall changing the definition of gay and lesbian from same sex attracted to same gender attracted. Allison was involved in setting up the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Alliance (LGBA) in October 2019 to advocate for the needs of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as same sex attracted people. Allison tweeted about her concerns and the LGB Alliance and complaints were made to her chambers, including one from an employee of Stonewall.
The investigation into the complaints was done with input from Stonewall and did not follow the chambers policy, Allison also noted her work dried up. Allison took her chambers and Stonewall to an Employment Tribunal for discrimination on the basis of her gender critical beliefs. In July 2022 Garden Chambers were found to have discriminated and victimised Allison on the basis of her beliefs and she was awarded aggravated damages.
The judge did not uphold the complaint that Stonewall had induced the discrimination. The full judgement is here summarised in Allison’s press release. Allison is in the process of appealing the decision regarding Stonewall.
Other people who have lost work and more over their gender critical views include:
Choreographer Rosie Kay who was ousted from her own dance company.
Comedian and writer Graham Linehan (creator of Father Ted, Black Books and The IT Crowd) who saw the aggression targeted towards feminists who raised concerns about Self ID so he began speaking out. Graham also raised concerns about what was happening in the GIDS service at the Tavistock on Newsnight in February 2020. The Interim Cass Review confirms what Graham said about the experimental nature of the treatment on children in that service. Graham has lost work, his marriage broke down, and he has been a target for abuse and death threats.
Author JK Rowling has been targeted with rape and death threats for speaking out about women’s rights. What Jo actually tweeted in June 2020 is available here along with some of the responses she received, (warning the responses use highly offensive language). Jo wrote a response essay to explain her position. Jo has continued to speak out for women’s rights and refuses to be cowed in the face of threats which include a tweet of her address and instruction on how to make a bomb.
There are many more cases of women and men both in the UK and USA who are trying to speak out being threatened at women’s rights meetings or lectures, have had talks cancelled or funding sources cut. They are labelled as ‘right wing’ ‘transphobic’ and ‘nazis’ by trans rights activists.
Kellie-Jay Keen (also known as Posie Parker) is a gender critical woman who speaks out for women’s rights and the protection of children; she seeks to give a voice to women who want to speak out but find themselves silenced on social media, so has arranged Let Women Speak events in the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand. Kellie Jay has been smeared through links being made to the far right in order to discredit and silence her and the other women who attend her events to speak: In New Zealand Kellie was portrayed as a Nazi in the media and in March 2023 large crowds turned up at her event in Auckland to protest; an older woman was punched and Kellie-Jay was grabbed, the event could not go ahead and the voices of women were silenced.
Kellie-Jay was historically involved with left wing feminism in the UK, she distanced herself from feminism due to the in-fighting and is focused on safeguarding women and children. Kellie-Jay is controversial because she allows any woman a platform to speak even if she disagrees with their views. On the whole attendees raise concerns about Self ID, men in women’s prisons and the dangers of trans ideology and the affirmation of children as trans, they come from all races, backgrounds and sexualities. Kellie is labelled as transphobic and hateful for her Gender Critical views; at the start of each event Kellie states her views clearly “Women don’t have penises, no man has a vagina, there is no such thing as non-binary and transitioning children is child abuse”. Kellie is outspoken, her words offend people who identify as trans or non-binary, but she has never incited hatred or harm towards trans identifying people, all her events are available to watch on YouTube (linked above on her name).
Further Reading & Watching:
Adult Human Female – A documentary about the clash between women’s rights and gender ideology Adult Human Female - Adult Human Female
Blaire White (transwoman) and Buck Angel (transman) discuss the modern gender movement;
Clinical Psychologist Alicia Hedley explains how she went from Trans Ally to Gender Critical; https://www.feministcurrent.com/2019/04/10/i-supported-trans-ideology-until-i-couldnt-anymore
Political Philosopher Holly Lawford-Smith on what Gender Critical Feminism is, what it is not and its roots in Radical Feminism; https://hollylawford-smith.org/what-is-gender-critical-feminism-and-why-is-everyone-so-mad-about-it/
Journalist Susanna Rustin on the dangers of erasing biological sex; Trying to erase the biological definition of sex isn’t just misguided – it’s dangerous | Susanna Rustin | The Guardian
Identity Crisis is a column and podcast by two young women aimed at young people talking about gender ideology and answering questions Identity Crisis: How Did You Become “Gender Critical”? (4w.pu