Conference Agenda

Scholarly literature on the ‘anti-gender’ movement in Europe has so far focused much of its attention on Central, Eastern and Southern Europe, often attributing the centrality of traditional gender and sexual norms to far-right and nationalist movements to the Catholic tradition. Taking the case of the UK, this paper demonstrates that anti-gender discourse has underpinned British media Euroscepticism over decades. Gender and sexuality have been overlooked by scholars of Brexit: mainstream academic accounts tell the story of the British as ‘reluctant Europeans’ with the hostile press focusing on national sovereignty and immigration in their construction of the European ‘Other’. Others cite the attempt to maintain power in the face of imperial decline. Yet, the UK’s accession to the EEC also coincided with significant challenges to gender and sexual norms, disrupting the patriarchal structures of the British Empire at a time when decolonisation was challenging its racial hierarchies. Later, both the EU and the European Court of Human Rights became key drivers of UK anti-discrimination law, particularly in relation to sexual orientation discrimination, sexual and family rights and legal gender recognition. Drawing on trans- and queer-feminist theories of nationalism and applying feminist narrative analysis of news media articles, this paper recounts a dominant story of ‘Europe’ as a threat to threat to the Church, the traditional family, and traditional gender roles as important aspects of ‘English culture’. Overall, the paper shows how news coverage of sexual rights stemming from ‘Europe’ have been underpinned by exclusive conceptions of national identity that deny women and queer folk a legitimate place in the nation. These findings are crucial for understanding the continued existence of gender and sexual inequalities in post-Brexit Britain but also the operation of anti-gender discourse across contexts.

Drawing on Miranda Fricker’s concept of epistemic injustice, this study examines the EU’s equality frames, highlighting the importance of intersectionally disadvantaged groups as ‘knowing agents for social change’ (Emejulu & Sobande, 2019: 3). By integrating epistemic justice and intersectionality into a single analytical framework, the research critically assesses five ‘Union of Equality’ strategies from 2020 onward—encompassing anti-racism, gender equality, LGBTQI+ equality, Roma equality, and disability rights.

The findings indicate a notable emphasis on intersectionality and epistemic justice in European equality policy frameworks. The strategies explicitly acknowledge systemic discrimination, referencing examples such as the #MeToo movement and harmful media portrayals; however, transformative measures that challenge power structures outright are less prominent than more instrumental goals geared toward economic or labour-market integration. Mechanisms for inclusive policymaking, such as the collection of intersectional data and the promotion of diverse storytelling in education and media, highlight a growing awareness of epistemic injustices. Although the strategies recognize how social identities intersect to produce disadvantage, they often treat these identities additively rather than as mutually constitutive. Efforts to involve historically and socially marginalized groups into policy are plentiful, yet they tend to favour expert networks and established organizations over grassroots voices, potentially limiting broader participation.

Accepting diversity by accepting LGBTI+ human and civil rights is the main objective of Member States of the European Union. Family life, marriage, and gender equality are protected under the European Convention on Human Rights. Despite EU treaties towards equality, pink families experience sociolegal discrimination in many EU societies (Hicks, 2006). This article conducts a critical policy discourse analysis of the law that extends civil partnership legislation to include same-sex couples in Greece. This law is examined as the first legal act that back in 2015, recognised queer family life in specific terms in the country– ie did not provide any legal recognition to parenthood. The discourse analysis of the paper highlights how notions of sexuality, family, gender, biological sex, and nation shape laws and public policy pronouncements and contribute to the incomplete policy frameworks.

By examining the plenary session transcripts of Greek Parliament meetings and public political discourse about the law, I aim to pursue an in-depth sociological analysis of what shapes the sociolegal attitudes around same-sex kinship. The results of the research show that heterosexism, hegemonic ideologies, and norms about gender and sexuality, as well as dominant views about religion, nation, and kinship, are determining (even the queer) family typology within contemporary heteropatriarchal social rules. These factors contribute to the legal and social exclusion of non-heteronormative families, who “deviate” from hegemonic heteropatriarchal societal rules. Socially constructed hegemonic patriarchal stereotypes set the so-called ‘normality’, and the standards of the heteronormative norms in policy and in practice, often exclude non-normative forms of kinship. Political actors and opposing public voices, by posing emerging calls to the political system for the protection of the ‘sacred’ constitution of ‘family’ and ‘children (future citizens) of the nation’, acted and continue to act collectively in view of voting the cohabitation agreement legislation and as result, pursed the legal exclusion of same-sex parenting rights.

This paper traces a significant discursive shift in attitudes to trans people in the UK between 2016 and 2024. It examines the proposals put forward by the Women and Equalities Select Committee (2016) to improve trans equality, juxtaposing them with current rhetoric in grass roots and policy settings (see, for example, Badenoch, 2024), questioning how a liberal discourse of rights and inclusion gave way to rhetoric based on exclusion (McLean, 2021; Turnbull-Dugarte and McMillan, 2023) Using a transfeminist approach, it contends that while the activism among grassroots organisations is a significant factor in current anti-trans policies and attitudes, the upsurge in hostility needs to be understood both in its broader international context (see, for example, Butler, 2024; Kuhar and Paternotte, 2017) and in relation to its amplification by figures in mainstream political parties (particularly, but not exclusively, Labour and the Conservatives). This paper therefore sheds light on the relationship between anti- gender and gender critical policy and discourses, and the particularity of the anti-gender and gender critical discourses and policy issuing from the UK as a secular state, which stands in contrast to other states with strong religious ties, such as France, Italy, and Poland, in which the state and pressure groups have pursued anti-trans policies on the basis that ‘gender’ as a construct harms the institution of the family (Graff and Korolczuk, 2022).

Badenoch, K. (2024). ‘We need to change the law to protect women’s spaces’, 2^nd June. Available at: https://www.kemibadenoch.org.uk/news/we-need-change-law-protect-womens-spaces (accessed 5th May).

Butler, J (2024). Who’s Afraid of Gender? London: Allen Lane.

House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee (2016). Transgender Equality, First Report of Session 2015–16, HC 390. London: The Stationery Office.

Graff, A and Korolczuk, E. (2022). Anti-Gender Politics in the Populist Moment. New York and London: Routledge.

Kuhar, R, & Paternotte, D (eds) 2017, Anti-Gender Campaigns in Europe: Mobilizing Against Equality, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Incorporated, Blue Ridge Summit. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. [6 February 2025].

McLean, C. (2021). The Growth of the Anti-Transgender Movement in the United Kingdom. The Silent Radicalization of the British Electorate. International Journal of Sociology, 51(6), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207659.2021.1939946

Pearce, R., Erikainen, S., & Vincent, B. (2020). TERF wars: An introduction. The Sociological Review, 68(4), 677-698. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026120934713

Turnbull-Dugarte, S.J. & McMillan, F. (2023), “Protect the women!” Trans-Exclusionary Feminist Issue-Framing and Support for Transgender Rights. Policy Studies Journal, 51(3): 463-70