TVP WEEKLY: Why do countercultural movements still have symbols of struggle in their logos: clenched fists, hammers and sickles? What are feminists still demanding today?

ZUZANNA JAKOWICKA: (Laughter) Let's not mix concepts! On my blog, there is a symbol of a clenched women's fist that represents the struggle for women's rights and was first used in 1968 in a protest against the Miss America pageant. Feminists used it to protest the objectification and commercialization of the female body. An advocate of this movement, of which I seek to be a representative today, was Robin Morgan, author of the book “Sisterhood Is Powerful," which had this very symbol on its cover. This fist did not mean a call to violence, but a determination to fight for one's rights, a willingness to resist.

Today, however, the logo of my blog "Feminism-yes, distortions- no" means something more, namely a call to raise public awareness. In my opinion, a feminist should know what is happening today in culture and politics in order to analyze events in terms of their impact on women. In Poland we are formally equal, but that does not mean that everything feminists wanted has been achieved. It is also good to remember that rights can be lost.

Robin Morgan is already an 82-year-old elderly lady, 55 years have passed since the feminist revolution, and women are objectifying themselves as they used to be objectified, only they are doing it themselves. Where is the fault of men in this, since the "liberated" women today adhere to the cult of appearance and narcissism on Instagram?

Women, just like men, relate to the outside world, especially in the age of social media. Who is not seduced by the quick reward of a "like," approval, or the chance to be in the spotlight for a while? This works especially well for young women and those in financial trouble hoping to change their fortunes. The role of modern feminists is to make women aware of how we are manipulated, especially by the marketing industry.

“We are” is the first person plural. It seems to me that feminists sometimes arrogate to themselves the right on the worldview: "we this," "we that," "we something else." A small group attributes the ideas they profess to half of humanity.

Yes, but I use this form to represent my group, feminists who have similar views to mine. I know, of course, that there are several factions of feminism today. There is material feminism, liberal feminism, and the newest feminism, queer feminism, which focuses mainly on denying the existence of two genders. And some feminists, like Britain's Kellie Jay Keen, are looking for a new "label," such as "femalism," that will unite across political lines. Proponents of the "Let Women Speak" campaign she launched assume they agree on one thing: Women are adults of the human species. Views on abortion, not to mention views on economic issues, lose meaning when the existence of two sexes in humans is questioned (this is called gender denial) and when previously progressive media, political parties, and non-governmental organizations deny women the right to speak out publicly against it.

Trans activists have recently attacked the aforementioned Kellie Jay Keen. In Polish, however, I have a problem with this... should I use the feminine or masculine form of the verb ?

Well, that's right, the issue of forms and pronouns is also becoming a point of contention. The problem is that transgender people are claiming the right to self-identify, that is, to define their gender based on an unverifiable mental state called gender identity, rather than biology. Men who feel they are women or feel they belong to neither gender want to be addressed in the form they prefer, which denies reality. Even worse for the feminists, however, is that they also want to enforce by law free access to women's sports, spaces and institutions.

Kellie Jay Keen is a pro-women activist, but also a family mother with a husband and four children, who is known to be highly critical of all the claims associated with today's progressive transgender movements. She says "no" to the use of pronouns that contradict reality, to trans women's access to women's locker rooms, to wards in prisons and institutions, and to competition in female sports categories. The attack on her took place in New Zealand, where an aggressive crowd nearly trampled her preventing her from speaking. Earlier, she had led a meeting in Australia where a group of men showed up performing Nazi salute, giving the media an excuse to wrongly associate the activist with Nazi views.

For years, the famous writer J.K. Rowling has also been subjected to systematic reprisals. According to trans activists, she does not have the right to announce that she does not agree with replacing the word woman with dehumanizing expressions such as "person with a uterus" or "menstruating person". Emotions are so high that philosopher Dr. Kathleen Stock, who challenged the trans activists' arguments in her book "Material Girls: Why Reality Matters for Feminism" and was constantly accused and harassed as a result, quit her job at Sussex University and recently went to her lecture in Oxford assisted by security guards. After all the lecture took place - thanks in part to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who supports freedom of expression.

Increasingly, Western feminists can no longer feel safe in proclaiming their views, as evidenced by the fact that Riley Gaines, an American swimmer who advocates women's sports, was held for three hours in one of the halls of a San Francisco university by an aggressive mob. We hear about such incidents practically every month.

Recently, I had to explain to friends who are a little older than me where all these flags came from. There is a rainbow flag, but a blue and white flag also appeared... What are the "club colours" of feminism today, when there are so many divisions within women activists?

It seems to me that feminism does not need a flag, even though in recent years it has been included under the LGBT rainbow flag on the wave of popularity of the so-called intersectional approach to discrimination. Many activists believe they are fighting against an unjust social system that similarly disadvantages many groups. They have moved away from a methodical examination of the situation of women in different life situations and criticise patriarchy as a mythical evil that mistreats women, gay men, and even black and Native American.

Traditional feminism does not have much in common with LGBT because it advocates for the rights of women, regardless of their sexual orientation. I am a lesbian, but I have such a problem with the LGBT community that the queer movements, the whole so-called "woke culture," are beginning to take the lead within that community. The rainbow flag of the homosexual community was first broken by the blue and white flag, the banner of the trans activists who now dominate the movement.

It is just that the transactivist movement promotes attitudes that are especially dangerous for young people, namely the medicalization of children who have doubts about their gender at puberty. A collective psychosis is created about the need for immediate hormone treatments and surgeries, rather than allowing teens to go through the crisis of adolescence. Parents are told that if they do not agree to this, the child will try to take his or her own life. Many of them even begin to believe in the possibility of having some kind of "sex soul" that does not match the body.

In Facebook groups for parents of children with gender identity issues, one even senses a kind of mission, something transcendent. Parents compete to see who will be more understanding and get their child a breast removal or hormone treatment, as if affirming an authentic self that does not match the child's body will ensure success in life. Unfortunately, this is more likely to lead to the rapid development of somatic diseases, not to mention the consequences of neglecting to treat mental disorders, which very often occur simultaneously.

So there are more and more letters after "LGBT," but the question is what is the relationship between these individual communities

The Equality Parade in Warsaw and the earlier LGBT movement grew out of a social initiative by people from that community and carried universalist demands. People are different, but should be treated equally, hence the name "Equality Parade" The homosexuals advocated not only for the freedom to enter into relationships, but also for the elimination of discrimination. Later, following the example of the LGBT movement in the West, where most of the goals were achieved, the trend of transgender people being more supported than homosexuals also took hold in Poland. Although, paradoxically, the right to change gender in our country has been in force since the 1960s.

The main problem, however, is that they have begun to promote the belief that each person has a sense of gender identity independent of the body, which is more important than biology. This means that everyone can decide for themselves whether they are heterosexual, gay or lesbian, regardless of physical conditions. In other words, a homosexual woman who sees herself as a man becomes heterosexual, and a heterosexual man who sees himself as a woman becomes a lesbian. In Poland, legal marriage for such lesbians has already been announced. The LGBT movement fought for years against such an approach to gender, while today it is spreading it.

    SIGN UP TO OUR PAGE 
  Hundreds of fictitious gender identities based solely on stereotypes have also emerged, such as when a woman who dresses like a man claims to be non-binary. Ordinary preferences based on personality, such as the need for an intellectual relationship or a romantic relationship, or a low libido, are now equated with sexual orientation. This trivializes and undermines the seriousness of the demands and the meaning of the social dialogue to formalize the rights of gay and lesbian families.

Is the LGBT community cohesive? Recently, a gay activist went in search of gays among conservatives and right-wing politicians.

​Bart Staszewski's actions revealing the sexual orientation of right-wing politicians would have been discrediting in the eyes of gay activists just a few years ago, because they were aware of the diversity of homosexuals and the potential harmfulness of such actions. Unfortunately, a trend is reaching Poland where LGBT individuals must adhere not only to the same value system, but also to political views. Instead of universalism, which emphasizes the similarities between people, we have identity politics, which emphasizes the differences.

It seems to me that LGBT today is an order strongly associated with left-wing parties, where there is no place for lesbian Catholics or conservative gays. There is also essentialization, that is, the belief that homosexuals, simply because of their orientation, are different from others in various dimensions of life and constitute a different culture.

Based on this belief, there are some rather absurd ideas like building apartment blocks only for lesbians in Berlin. One of the Polish portals Queer.pl asked if we would like to see something like that in Poland, and most readers answered no. After all, this is ghettoization, the creation of segregated urban spaces. We should strive for integration and not create enclaves for sexual minorities. Sometimes I get the impression that such ideas are the deliberate actions of a subversive group that wants to ridicule, internally disrupt, or undermine the effectiveness of the LGBT movement.

So the person who says that LGBT is not individual people with certain sexual preferences, but simply an ideology, is right?

I understand what the person who said that meant, but with those words - after the controversy they have caused - it is important to emphasize that the LGBT acronym is used to refer to certain groups of people, so such statements can end up provoking someone who is demoralized to attack, so they are not appropriate. However, the acronym itself is, of course, a convention, a thought, an idea. However, it is important to remember that this community has begun to adhere to a kind of ideology in which there is no place for other views. Moreover, there is no place for feminists who recognize a clear separation of the sexes in the biological sense. There is no place for joyful, inclusive gatherings or marches when slogans directed against us with threats are allowed. Moreover, the non-governmental organizations representing the interests of this community do not focus on fighting for social rights such as LGBT marriage, but on highlighting club entertainment or the realm of sexuality and, more recently, transgender issues.

Every ideology has tried to bend the world, sometimes going too far, to say the least. Changing the world is not a bad thing in itself; that's what politics is for, after all. But radicalization and detachment from reality are of no use to anyone.

However, many people, even very tolerant people, have a problem with the Equality Parade. They would not take their child there. This culture is often associated with a kind of hyper-sexuality.

Appearances by so-called drag queens at such events are indeed controversial, especially since - I do not know why - this kind of image has become a symbol of the LGBT movement. I suspect that the highlighting of what used to be called transvestism is done for marketing reasons, because it is unusual and colorful. However, it not only raises doubts about the seriousness of the demands for the legalization of family rights, but also ridicules women by presenting a caricatured image.

Drag culture is about styling oneself as a stereotypical woman, and this is exactly the image feminists have been fighting against for years. Drag queens have exaggerated makeup, big breasts, flirtatious movements. Let us think about what would happen if I wanted to dress up as a person of a different race or had a preference for dressing up as an elderly or disabled person. That would certainly be considered inappropriate, to say the least. And at the same time, we are forced to accept a man who appears in tights, stilettos, heavy makeup and a wig.

There is another dangerous issue, which is the emphasis on the sexual dimension of life, including fetishism or sadomasochism. In my opinion, disorders of sexual preference are no more common among gays and lesbians than in the rest of the population, so why should we be viewed through that prism?

Do you support solutions like access for transsexuals (men who consider themselves women) to women's locker rooms?

Many women who have experienced male harassment or violence are afraid to walk down the street alone after dark, let alone meet a man in a women's locker room. Even if that man "feels" like a woman. Unfortunately, it turns out that there are even more paraphilias in men, or what used to be simply called... deviations. One example is exhibitionism, which is the sexual gratification that comes from exposing oneself and masturbating in front of women who do not want it.

In the name of equality for trans people, men who considered themselves women in some countries have been transferred to women's prisons. Rape has occurred there. I cannot accept disturbed men abusing tolerance to harm women. Therefore, I do not agree that such people should have access to women's locker rooms or restrooms. If anything, separate rooms could be provided for such people. The kind that have already been created for people with disabilities or for the needs of parents with children.

I don't know if I heard correctly, because those are politically incorrect views, so I wanted to make sure you said, "Transgender men are perverts and should change in the handicapped locker room"?

I, for one, am not suggesting that people with gender identity issues are sexually violent or deviant. The problem is the very ambiguous and empirically anecdotal definition of gender identity as well as what some feminists imply: There is a percentage of transgender men who experience sexual arousal by imagining themselves as women, which is called autogynephilia. Therefore, it is difficult to speak of identity here when the issue is limited only to the realm of sexuality.

I repeat: I have nothing against a man wearing dresses or make-up, but this must not lead to such a man being committed to women's prisons or women's shelters for victims of violence because of his subjective self-image.

The proponents of tolerance for transgender people are large corporations and technology giants. Where does this come from?

Sex has always sold well because it appeals to the emotional sphere, which is harder to control with the mind, but it also distracts from other, more important world problems. I think all this "solidarity" of big business with minorities is just distracting from its own sins. I recommend a recent book by an American conservative who is even seeking the nomination for U.S. presidential candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy ("Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America's Social Justice Scam," translated and available for pre-order as "Woke S.A. Behind the Scenes of America's Social Justice Scam" - ed.). The author believes that corporations have turned to culturally marginalized groups to undermine discontent after receiving public subsidies during the crisis in the U.S. at the same time that ordinary people have been forced out of their homes. Corporations are trying to brand themselves as socially sensitive entities so that they can avoid the wrath of the poorer segments of American society. This is how the whole woke culture was born. Moreover, such policies provide work for a large number of diversity management specialists who would otherwise be superfluous. Fictitious problems are created and then attempts are made to solve them - with apparent success.

And don't you think all these LGBT demands today are just postmodernism off the chain?

Postmodernism emerged at the end of the 20th century. What was its essence? It proclaimed the end of grand narratives, the end of ideologies, the playing with discourses. Humanities scholars and artists played with it a bit, it seemed like it was going to be forgotten, and in fact it then quickly died out. However, when digital civilization emerged, it returned with tremendous momentum, because a generation emerged that lives in the virtual world, where it creates identities and juggles with avatars.

In addition, people who have grown up in Internet culture have the illusion that they can control what appears in their feeds and social media as if they were former publishers of the traditional press - nothing could be further from the truth. In this way, they create social media bubbles in which they create a safe, because unanimous, space by banning content and people with whom they disagree.

Perhaps they came to believe that the real world could also be shaped by such a unified narrative. They began to follow the idea that when the world makes you feel bad, you have to change the language, which is reminiscent of the postmodern philosopher Jacques Derrida's distorted maxim, "There is nothing outside the text." Distorted, because the author wasn't so naïve as to claim that material reality is a myth, but simply examined the structure of culture and language.

It seems that the concepts of Michel Foucault, who himself spurned postmodernism, are also experiencing a "second youth" - however, the issue here is not the scientific dispute, but the similarity between the views of modern activists and this philosopher's ideas about the nature of power. Power here is not between specific individuals, e.g., employers and employees, parents and children, but is a property of the entire social system. From this was derived, among other things, the idea that power hierarchies determine all cognition.

In the Enlightenment, truth was something we could discover through the scientific method, for example, whereas today it is imposed by the most socially powerful groups. For this reason, trans-activists believe that pretending that there are no biological differences between the sexes is just getting rid of the hassle of transgender people discrimination by the majority imposing gender division, rather than risking the credibility of research on the incidence and treatment of diseases in the female population.

The motives for their actions, however, can be found outside of postmodernism. Certainly, transhumanism plays an important role. The book "From Transgender to Transhuman: A Manifesto on the Freedom of Form" explains much. The author, Martine Rothblatt, is a wealthy man, an American entrepreneur, currently living as a woman. The book contains fantasies about the possibility of unlimited self-creation through body modification, with transgender being only an intermediate stage.

Investments by the technology industry - like Metaversum - and the medical industry probably have something to do with promoting such ideas. At the same time, it all fits with the age-old desire to create oneself, to escape the evil world and find salvation within oneself, as in gnosis, which makes the whole movement akin to a religious one.

– interviewed and translated Cezary Korycki

TVP WEEKLY. Editorial team and jornalists