Navigating the Ani-gender tide in global politics: An interview with Elżbieta Korolczuk by Gonçalo Cholant

It is undeniable that the last decade has witnessed a concerning surge in anti-gender movements all around the globe, particularly following the pivotal shift in politics, such as Donald Trump’s inauguration for his second term in January 2025 and the rise of far-right parties as political forces in several different governments, including Portugal. Trump’s re-ascension in the United States matches the increasing number of voices across Europe and Latin America, demonstrating an international ideological network that continues to expand, rather than signifying the proliferation of isolated cases of domestic battles.

Professor Elżbieta Korolczuk, a leading scholar in the field of anti-gender movements, was the keynote speaker in the 3rd International Postgraduate Colloquium in Feminist and Gender Studies “Encruzilhadas e Horizontes”, organized by the Ph.D. Program in Feminist Studies at the University of Coimbra on January 24^th, 2025. Her plenary lecture, titled “Anti-gender politics and feminist responses to this trend in a comparative perspective”, touched several ways in which the tendencies of anti-gender discourse and policy have intertwined, leading us to the present moment of global uncertainty. This interview delves into the multifaceted dimensions of the anti-gender movements and their impact, offering critical insights into the current sociopolitical climate. Her expertise, rooted in extensive research on social movements, the politics of gender, and right-wing populism, provides a crucial lens through which to better understand the complexity of anti-gender politics.

Professor Korolczuk’s work, including the acclaimed Anti-gender Politics in the Populist Moment (2021), co-authored with Agnieszka Graff, has garnered significant recognition. It received The Bronislaw Malinowski Award in the Social Sciences from the Polish Institute of Arts and Sciences of America in 2022. As a professor at the American Studies Center, Warsaw University, and Södertörn University in Stockholm, her academic contributions are complemented by her long-standing participation in human rights endeavors as an activist and a commentator. This blending of scholarly rigor and hands-on activism positions her as a vital voice in dissecting and analyzing the intricate web of anti-gender mobilizations.

The following interview offers an opportunity to explore the critical challenges faced by gender studies, human rights, and democratic principles in an era marked by heightened ideological polarization and the undoing of gender-critical advancements obtained in the last decades. It explores the expanding connections, influences, and the strategic ways in which political shifts have impacted policy making which often run counter to principles of equality, diversity and inclusion, propelled by ultraconservative and right-wing actors. In addition, the conversation touches upon the complex interplay between emotions and political life, the vital task of fostering solidarity across diverse landscapes, and their profound implications in human rights and international understandings of dignity and respect. Finally, it contemplates the future horizon of feminist scholarship amidst ongoing attacks on higher education institutions, offering reflections on resilience and the enduring struggle for justice.

Professor Elżbieta Korolczuk offers a timely and indispensable contribution to understanding the complex dynamics of anti-gender movements in the 21^st century. Her insights provide a robust framework for academic inquiry and activists engagement, urging a nuanced consideration on power, emotion, solidarity, and the enduring struggle for democratic values and human rights in an increasingly contested global arena. The following interview happened on July 1^st, 2025.

Gonçalo Cholant: How do you see the rise of anti-gender movements in the liberal democracies of the west after the inauguration of Donald Trump in the US and the increasing presence of far-right voices in western Europe?

Elżbieta Korolczuk: Anti-gender movements have had a global presence for decades now. Organisations such as the World Congress of Families, the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Political Network for Values or the TFP are well-networked and coordinated across different contexts. They also receive financial support from the US, Russia, the EU and other sources (Tip of the Iceberg June 2021). The re-election of Donald Trump and the far right's electoral victories in Western Europe will invigorate these groups, providing them with more funding, political support, and access to power at both the legislative and executive levels. This leads to the implementation of anti-feminist, homophobic and racist policies that are not supported by the majority of the population in these countries, but which are being effectively pushed for by right-wing actors and ultraconservative religious groups. It is clear now that anti-gender politics should be seen as an important push for de-democratization, also in contexts where democracy seems stable as in the case of Sweden and other Scandinavian countries (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09589236.2024.2446345). Anti-gender actors attack freedom of speech and assembly, seek to limit academic freedom and independence of academic institutions, promote violent discourses and policies toward minority groups, and embrace inequalities, including economic inequalities. It is clear that anti-gender politics is antithetical to democracy and we should all work to oppose it.

GC: Can we engage with emotions without risking falling into manipulation? How can democracies resist the urge to use the same logic of their opposers?

EK: Emotions are an integral part of political life. We should not underestimate their impact, nor should we consider them to be the sole preserve of 'populist' politics. Fear, anger, hope, solidarity and joy have always been the building blocks of social movements, prompting people to push for social change. However, we should remember that emotions are embedded in the matrix of power, and the question of who holds power, to what extent, and how it is exercised, should always be part of the debate. Nowadays, right-wing actors readily employ progressive language and present themselves as a marginalised group. They strive to evoke emotions such as fear, as well as hope, empathy, and solidarity with the underdogs. Thus, no matter who is speaking, we should always ask whether the claims made represent reality and how power and privilege work in society. The truth is not lost; what is often lost is the ability and willingness to hold those in power to account.

GC: How can solidarity be fostered across different landscapes of privilege? What has gender as a concept been able to do to resist the fragmentation and oppose the isolationist tendencies of our times?

EK: I don’t believe that solidarity flows naturally from shared disadvantaged conditions or empathy towards the suffering. Rather, solidarity is constructed through political means, including recognising power imbalances, attributing responsibility, and uniting around shared goals and a vision for the future. An intersectional perspective on gender shows us that no social category stands alone; we always find ourselves at the intersection of different characteristics, and privilege is not a stable position but a relationship that changes depending on the context. The problem is that not all feminist movements embrace such a perspective.

Personally, I believe that we need to build solidarity based on a vision of shared futures rather than merely calling out privilege or recognising its absence. In recent decades the left has lost its position as a political power capable of imagining a desirable future. It's not rocket science. Most people want a future with more stable jobs, cleaner air, and access to education and healthcare. They want stability, security, recognition and redistribution. Progressive political actors should be able to address these needs and offer a vision of the future for all.

GC: How do you see the impact of Trump’s rhetoric after his inauguration considering his subsequent policies and executive orders? How have the far-right populist movements received, and benefited from, this ideological shift?

EK: Far-right actors have benefited from Trump’s rhetoric and policies in many ways, including gaining access to political power and decision-making spaces, as well as gaining legitimacy and funding for their misogynistic and racist views. People with no qualifications for holding key offices in Trump’s administration are appointed because they are loyal to him and share his worldview. But what is even more disturbing is how many people have been lost, both in the US and abroad.

In terms of women's issues, one of Trump's first actions was to sign an executive order requiring pregnant women to undergo an ultrasound scan and listen to the foetal heartbeat before terminating their pregnancy. In states where abortion is almost completely banned, such as Texas, almost all independent gynaecological clinics offering healthcare to the poorest women, as well as abortions, have already closed. Consequently, the perinatal mortality rate has increased. The same goes for trans persons. An executive order issued on 28 January 2025 explicitly prohibits federal funding, such as Medicaid or Medicare, from covering gender-affirming treatments, including puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries, for anyone under 19. Such care is labelled as 'chemical and surgical mutilation', and as a result, hospitals providing these services have paused care. This could affect over 300,000 transgender teenagers in the US. Added to this is official erasure of trans persons’ existence through banning their recognition in documents, sports and public arena.

The death toll abroad is already staggering. As the US Agency for International Development (USAID) provided over 40% of global humanitarian funding, the decision to cut these funds will have catastrophic effects. A study published by The Lancet predicts that 14 million people will die as a result of the cuts. Evaluating the impact of two decades of USAID interventions and projecting the effects of defunding on mortality up to 2030: a retrospective impact evaluation and forecasting analysis - The Lancet

All these are politically motivated acts of cruelty. And we need to read them as such.

GC: What does thinking globally mean in our times? How has it impacted the anti-gender movement? Is there a clear unified agenda of progress that can be used in local contexts as a means of resistance? Does this paradigm still work?

EK: It’s a really interesting issue, showing how right-wing actors take over themes and discourses that originated on the left. Critiques of globalisation are one example of this trend. In the early 2000s, critiques of globalisation largely came from the left, including feminist movements which exposed the economic, social and environmental harms caused by the expansion of the global market and political integration. Over time, however, opposition diversified, and by the 2010s it included religious fundamentalists and conspiracy theorists, with some groups on the far right blaming globalisation on Jewish influence – a trend with a long history. Today, right-wing backlash often targets gender equality and LGBTQ+ rights, portraying them as symbols of a liberal global order. A loose coalition of national and transnational actors — political parties, religious groups and NGOs — collectively described as the anti-gender movement, position themselves as opponents of globalisation and defenders of ordinary people. They portray 'gender' as a threatening global ideological force pushing for changes in sexuality, identity and family structures. Thus, they demonise gender in order to rally opposition against women's and LGBTQ+ rights, particularly when these are linked to global institutions and treaties such as the Istanbul Convention.

The idea of global progress as a unified agenda no longer works, due to critiques from both the left and the right. Moreover, I am not convinced that we should try to revive this paradigm, particularly given that we know now that progress is neither linear nor inevitable. However, I would stress that we still have universal values and needs that people across the globe share: the need for security (economic and otherwise), the need for their basic rights to be recognised and respected by those in power, and the need to have a chance at a good, fulfilling life. Once again, I am advocating anchoring political struggle in people’s everyday embodied experiences rather than in complex ideological projects. I don’t think we need to reinvent the wheel, rather we need to be able to fight for and implement politics that truly benefits the society as a whole, rather than just the richest 1 %.

GC: What is the horizon of feminist scholarship? Can you envision major changes or trends implemented globally? How do you see the recent attacks on higher education institutions through the lens of anti-gender movements?

EK: I don’t know what the horizon of feminist scholarship is, but I do believe we should hold on to hope. The effects of anti-gender attacks can be surprising and counterintuitive: such attacks can actually revitalise the fight for equality. In Poland, after 2019 the anti-gender movement started to push for establishing so called “LGBT-free zones” at the local level and in a short time 1/3 of Polish regions accepted such a declaration. These were just symbolic resolutions, but they had real effects: pride events were canceled, funding for equality programs was cut, and local LGBTQ+ communities felt increasingly unsafe and unwelcome. This has mobilized the LGBTQ community. Activists responded with protests, international campaigns, petitions to the European Union to condemn the zones and to withhold funds for regions that adopted them, as well as going to administrative courts. As a result by the beginning of 2025 all such zones had been repealed. In Hungary, the Orban’s regime opposition to LGBTQ rights also led to a wide-scale mobilization. In June 2025 the Pride March in Budapest gathered a record number of participants, some sources claim it was over 200.000 people, which would make it the biggest protest in the country since the 1990s, despite or because of the ban issued by the regime. The protest has shown Orban’s weakness and reinvigorated hope for political change.

The same happens in academia: thanks to the joint efforts of a group of young academics, a new Master's program called "Gender and Sexuality" opened at the University of Warsaw in 2025, one of the few of its kind in the country. And there is now a bigger number of academics interested in feminist perspectives than ever before. Going against the tide is risky, but this is nothing new. Despite the right-wing propaganda in most countries across the worldgender studies remained marginal, underfunded and treated with suspicion by the academic mainstream. Current attacks on gender studies show what we have always known: no major restructuring of hegemonic knowledge systems goes unopposed.

GC: Could you provide some advice for young scholars that center their research on gender? What should they pay attention to in the years to come?

EK: I would rather listen to young scholars and activists to better understand how they see the world, and what challenges and opportunities are most important to them. I see many young people fighting for a better world despite the odds being stacked against them and despite hopelessness and fatigue. For that, I am deeply grateful.