For years, I have tried to comprehend the feminist claim that gender identity and expression are a men’s rights issue. Finally, I got a little clarity listening to a radical feminist, a former member of the British Labour Party, discuss the issue of trans-identified men’s participation in women’s sports. She said something to the effect that “women’s sports matter more than men’s feelings.” I get it. Radical feminists made trans-identified men’s participation in women’s sports the focal point of their opposition to gender ideology. In doing so, they overlook the fact that it was pro-feminist governments, the Obama Administration in the United States, and the Liberal Government in Canada led by Justin Trudeau, that made gender identity and expression prohibited grounds of discrimination. It was based on Titles VII and IX in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the United States–provisions in the legislation that addressed women’s equality. In Canada, Trudeau openly and proudly proclaimed that he was a feminist and wanted everyone to convert. The Trudeau government amended the Canadian Human Rights Act with the passage of Bill C-16 to include gender identity and expression as prohibited grounds of discrimination.

At the time, I was puzzled; it was the last thing I expected from a self-identified feminist Prime Minister of Canada. He must have known that would drive a wedge in the ranks of his feminist base. It was sure it was a political miscalculation. Now, I understand that it was a cynical political calculation. Gender-critical feminists opposed the passage of Bill C-16 into law. Following the passage of Bill C-16 into law, gender-critical feminists launched a campaign for its repeal. On November 18, 2019, gender-critical feminists published the Canadian Women’s Declaration, An Appeal to Repeal Bill C-16. Now, I understand that it was a cynical political calculation. I cannot say for sure, but I suspect the motivation was the same for the Obama Administration. Feminism is an ideology riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies, so asking feminists to agree on a definition of a woman started a controversy that spilled over into broader society. It was like Europe following the Protestant Reformation when people went to war because they could not agree on the number of sacraments, if any, and the authority of Scripture versus Tradition. In the present, people are fighting over gender identity and expression, the definition of a woman, and whether gender identity is real or made-up nonsense.

Gender-critical or radical feminists deny the validity of gender identity and expression and blame men for their invention and inclusion in civil rights law. They are so fixated on trans-identified men, opportunists who took advantage of amendments to civil rights legislation to invade women’s sports and advance their careers in business and politics. They show little concern for the girls and women who are groomed into gender-affirming care that typically results in maiming their bodies and infertility. Neither are they concerned about the boys who are chemically and surgically castrated when their families decide that they are girls. Nor do they acknowledge that gender-inclusive feminists are championing the cause. No, they insist that they are not feminists. Lesbian feminists are found in both camps in the divide over gender ideology, and both sides blame men for the state of affairs. Also, both factions of lesbian feminism expect gay men to drop everything and side with them against the other. Failure to do so results in gay men being labelled as misogynists and transphobes; as a gay man, you are damned if you don’t and damned if you do.

So, gay men are caught between a rock and a hard place. We won our rights through determined advocacy that brought societal changes in attitudes toward male homosexuality and amendments to the law that guarantee our civil liberties. Following the inclusion of gender identity and expression in civil rights law, the queering of male homosexuality and the expanding alphabet soup acronym, both feminist inventions, everything we achieved is threatened, and the political interests that fostered this state of affairs are unconcerned. At best, they see gay men and their predicament as collateral damage. So, call me an anti-queer bigot, a misogynist, and a transphobe if you must. Still, I stand by my advocacy for gay men and boys against the infiltration of feminist-driven gender identity politics into gay men’s and boy’s rights.

Posted by Geoffrey