"In particular,["I’m Real, Not You"] tries to slam 'women’s and feminist movements' for engaging with 'right-wing populist-centered anti-gender coalitions, which include right-wing religious, conservative, and right-wing extremist actors.' "
The framing seems overblown but the risk is real.
For example, the right-wing extremist Stephen Miller's America First Legal [1] is doing what so far no mainstream lawyers have been willing to do, namely sue in order to roll back the excesses of gender identity ideology. America First Legal's cases include: [2]
Rachel Walden v. Mesa Unified School District, et al.
Case Number: CV2023-018263, Superior Court of the State of Arizona
The case challenges a public school's alleged policy of not notifying parents about their children's gender transition at school.
Matthew Foldi and Bethany Mandel v. Board of Education for Montgomery County, et al.
Case Number: 8:23-cv-03089-TJS, D. Md.
The school is alleged to have wrongfully prohibited plaintiffs from attending a school board meeting where they planned to protest the "LGBT-themed books required in the [school] curriculum" and the termination of parent's right to opt their children out of the "woke curriculum."
International Partners for Ethical Care, et al. v. Jay Inslee, et al. (SB 5599)
Case Number: 23-cv-05736, W.D. Wash.
"Washington state’s Senate Bill 5599 is a new law that allows shelters to take in children struggling with gender dysphoria and potentially provide them with life-altering 'care' (potentially including sterilization) without parental consent or knowledge. The recently signed legislation creates a dangerous incentive for minors who disagree with their parents on 'gender-affirming care' to run away to a shelter or host home. The new law takes away a requirement of notice to parents."
Doe, et al. v. Horne, et al.
Case Number: 23-cv-00185, Dist. Ariz.
Defending a challenge to "Arizona’s 'Save Women’s Sports Act' [that] prohibits biological males from playing on girls’ sports teams at public schools. "
This aggressive gender critical litigation docket may sound ideal until one considers America First Legal's other cases. They advance a MAGA/right-wing agenda against the Biden administration, support the anti-abortion cause, pursue right-wing Christian objectives, raise claims of alleged voter fraud - in short, cater to "right-wing religious, conservative, and right-wing extremist actors" on issues and in ways that will be familiar to critics of the Trump/MAGA movement.
Gender critical activists who do not want to make themselves easy and unnecessary targets of trans rights activists would do well to distance themselves from America First Legal and right-wing actors like it even (or especially) if they appear to be advancing the cause against gender identity ideology.
Separately, in November 2023, Genspect, an "international organisation [that] includes professionals, trans people, detransitioners, and parent groups who work together to advocate for a non-medicalised approach to gender diversity" invited right-wing internet troll James Linsday to speak at its conference in Denver on the supposed "Marxification of Gender." [3]
This is what the respected pioneers in journalistic coverage of detransitioners Jesse Singal and Katy Herzog had to say about James Linsday and cultural Marxism on their podcast "Blocked and Reported" shortly after the event. Singal not only attended the conference but turned down a request to be a speaker on the grounds that to do so would violate journalistic ethics.
Episode 191: A Man in a Dress in a Pile-On. 18 November 2023.
“This week on Blocked and Reported, Jesse and Katie discuss the furor over a self-described autogynephile who wore a dress to a gender conference. Also, Zoomers discover 9/11.”
[Here, Jesse and Katie discuss Genspect’s Denver conference of November 4 – 5, which co-host Jesse Singal attended. Before turning to the main topic of their conversation, Jesse gives his opinion on James Lindsay and Mr. Lindsay's talk at the conference.]
(40:00) Jesse: And most regrettably, from where I sit, they invited James Lindsay to give a talk on the Marxification of gender.
Katie: Yeah, James Lindsay. That jumped out at me, and it strikes me that if you want to be taken seriously outside of your bubble, James Lindsay is not the person to invite to speak at your conference, especially on this issue. Like if your conference is about how to have impossible conversations, maybe invite him. But if your conference is about gender, maybe not.
Jesse: Yeah. I mean, from my point of view, someone like Lindsay just tips you in the direction away from legitimate science and discourse, of which there was plenty at this conference, and into demagoguery. James Linsday is not a serious voice on sex and gender. His talk made very little sense. He just has these, like . . . his theories are very superficial and often misguided, in my view. And he’s a huge prick online, a massive asshole, which does not help anyone. Which most people associated with Genspect are not.
/ / /
(43:05) Katie: Actually, I do want to get a little bit more into [James Linsday’s] talk, if you don’t mind. Did he seem crazy, the way he was speaking, the way he does on Twitter? Because he comes across on Twitter like a giant, flaming, fucking asshole.
Jesse: He was more charismatic and less crazy-seeming than I thought, and more polished. There had been one TV appearance that he’d done in the past that was just a train wreck.
Katie: He didn’t just recite a bunch of citations?
Jessie: Well, no. He dropped a lot of names. And I haven’t rewatched it since I saw it. He makes all these claims trying to link everything to Marxism and a lot of what he’s saying is what ideologues in general do: accepting different standards of evidence, trying to change the subject . . . He has, like, this grand theory. Yascha Mounk’s book talks about how a lot of this stuff [i.e., post-structuralist ideologies] isn’t Marxism. It’s postmodern, it’s a rejection of these grand theories. I don’t think he really latches onto the nuances of what’s going on or how much of this is human nature and ideology in general. He claims to be an expert on all these different thinkers. I don’t think he is.
Surprisingly, James Lindsay has vocal defenders on other gender-critical Substacks. It is not uncommon now to encounter commenters on gender-critical Substacks who uncritically attribute gender identity ideology to cultural Marxism and embrace the conspiracy theory that links DEI, CRT and gender together as part of a Marxist assault against America. That should be a source of worry to centrist and moderate gender critical independents and Democrats.
It is worth noting that another notable promoter of the cultural Marxism canard is the right-wing Heritage Foundation. In November 2022, the Heritage Foundation published "How Cultural Marxism Threatens the United States—and How Americans Can Fight It."[5]
For clear and convincing proof of the prominent position that the Heritage Foundation's occupies on the far right, one need look no further than Heritage Foundation's other, more recent venture, its infamous Project 2025. [6]
Part of the Trump/MAGA movement's assault on our liberal, constitutional democracy, if implemented Project 2025 would concentrate unprecedented power in the hands of the president in ways that would allow Trump to undermine the institutions that prevent the nation from sliding into autocracy. If this sounds like guilt by association, it's because that's precisely what it is.
In the struggle to contain and roll back gender ideology as well as in other political projects it is important to remember that the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.
"In particular,["I’m Real, Not You"] tries to slam 'women’s and feminist movements' for engaging with 'right-wing populist-centered anti-gender coalitions, which include right-wing religious, conservative, and right-wing extremist actors.' "
The framing seems overblown but the risk is real.
For example, the right-wing extremist Stephen Miller's America First Legal [1] is doing what so far no mainstream lawyers have been willing to do, namely sue in order to roll back the excesses of gender identity ideology. America First Legal's cases include: [2]
Rachel Walden v. Mesa Unified School District, et al.
Case Number: CV2023-018263, Superior Court of the State of Arizona
The case challenges a public school's alleged policy of not notifying parents about their children's gender transition at school.
Matthew Foldi and Bethany Mandel v. Board of Education for Montgomery County, et al.
Case Number: 8:23-cv-03089-TJS, D. Md.
The school is alleged to have wrongfully prohibited plaintiffs from attending a school board meeting where they planned to protest the "LGBT-themed books required in the [school] curriculum" and the termination of parent's right to opt their children out of the "woke curriculum."
International Partners for Ethical Care, et al. v. Jay Inslee, et al. (SB 5599)
Case Number: 23-cv-05736, W.D. Wash.
"Washington state’s Senate Bill 5599 is a new law that allows shelters to take in children struggling with gender dysphoria and potentially provide them with life-altering 'care' (potentially including sterilization) without parental consent or knowledge. The recently signed legislation creates a dangerous incentive for minors who disagree with their parents on 'gender-affirming care' to run away to a shelter or host home. The new law takes away a requirement of notice to parents."
Doe, et al. v. Horne, et al.
Case Number: 23-cv-00185, Dist. Ariz.
Defending a challenge to "Arizona’s 'Save Women’s Sports Act' [that] prohibits biological males from playing on girls’ sports teams at public schools. "
This aggressive gender critical litigation docket may sound ideal until one considers America First Legal's other cases. They advance a MAGA/right-wing agenda against the Biden administration, support the anti-abortion cause, pursue right-wing Christian objectives, raise claims of alleged voter fraud - in short, cater to "right-wing religious, conservative, and right-wing extremist actors" on issues and in ways that will be familiar to critics of the Trump/MAGA movement.
Gender critical activists who do not want to make themselves easy and unnecessary targets of trans rights activists would do well to distance themselves from America First Legal and right-wing actors like it even (or especially) if they appear to be advancing the cause against gender identity ideology.
Separately, in November 2023, Genspect, an "international organisation [that] includes professionals, trans people, detransitioners, and parent groups who work together to advocate for a non-medicalised approach to gender diversity" invited right-wing internet troll James Linsday to speak at its conference in Denver on the supposed "Marxification of Gender." [3]
This is what the respected pioneers in journalistic coverage of detransitioners Jesse Singal and Katy Herzog had to say about James Linsday and cultural Marxism on their podcast "Blocked and Reported" shortly after the event. Singal not only attended the conference but turned down a request to be a speaker on the grounds that to do so would violate journalistic ethics.
========================================================================
Blocked and Reported [4]
Episode 191: A Man in a Dress in a Pile-On. 18 November 2023.
“This week on Blocked and Reported, Jesse and Katie discuss the furor over a self-described autogynephile who wore a dress to a gender conference. Also, Zoomers discover 9/11.”
[Here, Jesse and Katie discuss Genspect’s Denver conference of November 4 – 5, which co-host Jesse Singal attended. Before turning to the main topic of their conversation, Jesse gives his opinion on James Lindsay and Mr. Lindsay's talk at the conference.]
(40:00) Jesse: And most regrettably, from where I sit, they invited James Lindsay to give a talk on the Marxification of gender.
Katie: Yeah, James Lindsay. That jumped out at me, and it strikes me that if you want to be taken seriously outside of your bubble, James Lindsay is not the person to invite to speak at your conference, especially on this issue. Like if your conference is about how to have impossible conversations, maybe invite him. But if your conference is about gender, maybe not.
Jesse: Yeah. I mean, from my point of view, someone like Lindsay just tips you in the direction away from legitimate science and discourse, of which there was plenty at this conference, and into demagoguery. James Linsday is not a serious voice on sex and gender. His talk made very little sense. He just has these, like . . . his theories are very superficial and often misguided, in my view. And he’s a huge prick online, a massive asshole, which does not help anyone. Which most people associated with Genspect are not.
/ / /
(43:05) Katie: Actually, I do want to get a little bit more into [James Linsday’s] talk, if you don’t mind. Did he seem crazy, the way he was speaking, the way he does on Twitter? Because he comes across on Twitter like a giant, flaming, fucking asshole.
Jesse: He was more charismatic and less crazy-seeming than I thought, and more polished. There had been one TV appearance that he’d done in the past that was just a train wreck.
Katie: He didn’t just recite a bunch of citations?
Jessie: Well, no. He dropped a lot of names. And I haven’t rewatched it since I saw it. He makes all these claims trying to link everything to Marxism and a lot of what he’s saying is what ideologues in general do: accepting different standards of evidence, trying to change the subject . . . He has, like, this grand theory. Yascha Mounk’s book talks about how a lot of this stuff [i.e., post-structuralist ideologies] isn’t Marxism. It’s postmodern, it’s a rejection of these grand theories. I don’t think he really latches onto the nuances of what’s going on or how much of this is human nature and ideology in general. He claims to be an expert on all these different thinkers. I don’t think he is.
========================================================================
Surprisingly, James Lindsay has vocal defenders on other gender-critical Substacks. It is not uncommon now to encounter commenters on gender-critical Substacks who uncritically attribute gender identity ideology to cultural Marxism and embrace the conspiracy theory that links DEI, CRT and gender together as part of a Marxist assault against America. That should be a source of worry to centrist and moderate gender critical independents and Democrats.
It is worth noting that another notable promoter of the cultural Marxism canard is the right-wing Heritage Foundation. In November 2022, the Heritage Foundation published "How Cultural Marxism Threatens the United States—and How Americans Can Fight It."[5]
For clear and convincing proof of the prominent position that the Heritage Foundation's occupies on the far right, one need look no further than Heritage Foundation's other, more recent venture, its infamous Project 2025. [6]
Part of the Trump/MAGA movement's assault on our liberal, constitutional democracy, if implemented Project 2025 would concentrate unprecedented power in the hands of the president in ways that would allow Trump to undermine the institutions that prevent the nation from sliding into autocracy. If this sounds like guilt by association, it's because that's precisely what it is.
In the struggle to contain and roll back gender ideology as well as in other political projects it is important to remember that the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.
[1] https://aflegal.org/about/#leadership
[2] https://aflegal.org/litigation/
[3] https://genspect.org/the-bigger-picture-continues-denver-colorado/
[4] https://www.blockedandreported.org/p/episode-191-a-man-in-a-dress-in-a#details
[5] https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/event/how-cultural-marxism-threatens-the-united-states-and-how-americans-can-fight-it#
[6] https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/project-2025