Alexis Lara (Algemesí, 1989) has just published Negacionisme de gènere. Auge, expanió i mites de l’antifeminisme (Alfons el Magànim) where he delves into the roots and motivations of this growing movement that – sponsored by the most conservative political class – attacks the battle for equality. Lara analyzes why feminism has been put in the spotlight and how social networks and the new media ecosystem favor this type of discourse that moves quickly: “Opinion circulates faster than science.”
In the protest week of 8-M, reading this work, which was presented this Friday at La Repartidora in Benimaclet, becomes even more appropriate.
What is gender denialism?
Flat-Eartherism, the anti-vaccine movement, the historical revisionism of the Franco dictatorship or anti-feminism have one point in common: the denial of a reality that can be contrasted and demonstrated by the natural and social sciences. In this sense, gender deniers believe that biological sex is the only factor that determines what a man or woman is like and how they behave.
That is, the denialist movement denies that there are social factors behind these behaviors and, therefore, ignores the reality of a social, political and economic structure that relegates women to the background. In essence, gender denialism is a social science denialism.
On the other hand, it is one of the most difficult denialisms to combat, since it is crossed by deeply rooted identity and cultural elements. Let’s think about what it has meant to be a real man or a good woman at different times and how certain moral guidelines have been strictly followed by so many people throughout their lives to conform to what was expected of them. Gender denialism reacts with fear and contempt to these questions and challenges.
Why does its rise coincide with the pandemic and ‘conspiracy’ speeches?
It is true that conspiracy theories function as a gateway to scientific denialism in general, although it must also be recognized that gender denialism has always been latent in societies. The book provides a brief historical review of the most recent cases such as the indignation against the suffrage movement, the response to May ’68, the Franco dictatorship or the reaction to the social advances of the years 2000-2010.
However, with the pandemic, sociologists were able to see how certain trends that we had been contemplating in recent years were crystallizing, especially with what had to do with the ICT revolution. The mass audience of traditional media has given way to the niche audiences of social media and this new media ecosystem allows people who were previously isolated by their minority opinions to now have the opportunity to share that opinion without fear of feel displaced and even allowing them to create communities.
In times of uncertainty, humans crave certainties and the pandemic was one of those moments. The key to understanding this rise of conspiracy theories is that opinion circulates faster than science. While the latter has its times and processes before reaching a consensus and finally a conclusion, the formation of an opinion is immediate. In the best of cases, the space that is not occupied by science is occupied by opinion, and in the worst by misinformation, conspiracy theories and denialisms.
Why is feminism being put in the spotlight and why precisely now?
Feminism has always been in the spotlight. And it is because it is a movement that turns the conception of our world upside down. If we think in terms of identity, people define who we are based on our national or regional identity; our work identity (perhaps increasingly diluted); and, of course, gender identity, which largely shapes behavior in society from our childhood to our old age. We men and women have not been educated in the same way, nor have we expected the same from each other. Changing these roles, equalizing them (which is what feminism aims to do), is completely changing our vision of the world. That is why the movement is permanently in the spotlight.
In the book you cite two lobbies that fuel gender denialism. Who are they and how do they act?
The religious issue is present in the majority of these lobbies, since there is a basic principle that they are not willing to renounce and this is the conception of the patriarchal-Catholic family, the one formed by the man of the house, the wife and the children. , as the only existing family model. We see that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, the anti-abortion associations and the ultra-conservative economic elites make up a network that encompasses everything from the media to political parties, including social entities through astroturfing, the technique that manipulates public opinion by passing off demonstrations and mobilizations scheduled and planned by spontaneous and popular character. The objective of these lobbies is simple, they seek to influence political power to achieve restrictive laws and public policies in terms of gender equality, family diversity and sexual and reproductive rights. And the method to achieve this is to influence public opinion.
How does the political rise of the extreme right affect validating these discourses?
The rise of the extreme right and gender denialism come hand in hand and feed off each other. The extreme right is, after all, the political translation of a reaction to progress and its fuel is usually identity elements such as exclusive nationalism or gender or class identity. Without gender denialism, the extreme right would not be a reality in some of the governments of the European Union; But without the extreme right we would not experience the rise and expansion of gender denialism either. Both ideologies validate and nourish each other discursively and also in organizational terms. You just have to see the coming and going of personalities and leaderships that fluctuate between the associations, foundations, media and parties that make up this network.
Are these types of slogans reaching young people?
The data speaks for itself and is alarming. At the end of 2023, 23.1% of young men believed that gender violence “does not exist or is an ideological invention.” This figure was only 10% in 2017. These are data from the Reina Sofía Center and Fad Juventud. We are talking about the fact that almost 1 in 5 young people deny a reality that is easily verifiable and demonstrable, such as the more than 1,200 women killed by gender violence since January 1, 2003. The worrying thing is that the slogans of gender denialism They are effectively penetrating insofar as they frame the debate in a purely ideological and not a sociological issue.
She cites seven myths of antifeminism in the book. Which ones do the most damage to the feminist movement?
Surely the myth that violence has no gender is one of the most repeated and permeated in society. According to the deniers, violence is violence wherever it comes from, regardless of the social background and, therefore, delving into the motivations of what leads a man to murder his partner is unnecessary. This, furthermore, connects with one of the main ideas of the book that describes gender denialism as an anti-intellectualist and anti-scientific movement, which seeks to reduce the debate to its minimum expression, staying on the surface of the issue. It does so through pointing out and ridiculing the social sciences, which are the disciplines that study the root of these problems.
Where does this type of speech take us?
They lead us to more unequal societies and, if you ask me, sadder. The richness of the human being is in its diversity and plurality. A man can be a man in a thousand different ways and so can a woman. Denying that this can be the case and that we have to pigeonhole our behavior into specific roles, defined centuries ago by no one really knows who, implies a setback in individual freedom and the happiness of being able to decide to be whoever one wants to be.
It also leads us towards anti-feminist public policies; to an ideology embodied in laws that curtail sexual and reproductive rights such as abortion or LGTBI marriage; to economic issues related to salary equalization and equal opportunities; or even protection of women against sexist violence.
