TERF and Scapegoating: An Unsuccessful Pact with the Devil

November is marked by the struggle for the rights and visibility of TGNCI (trans, intersex, and gender non-conforming) people.

Although the term “transgender” only entered the vocabulary of LGBTI+ activism in the 1960s, traditions that deviate from gender binarism and the patriarchal understanding of gender roles as inseparably tied to sex assigned at birth have been recorded throughout every era of human history. Unfortunately, the history of transphobia reaches just as far back. The innate fear of the unfamiliar has, for millennia, been used to justify violence and lynching against those whose existence does not conform to established social norms.

Despite a long history of intersectionality within leftist movements—built on recognising discrimination and repression as social problems and tools for maintaining homogenised groups at the top of the social hierarchy, rather than isolated phenomena—transphobia has ironically permeated, among others, both women’s rights movements and LGBTI+ rights movements.

“Scapegoating” – the act of blaming a person or group for something bad that has happened or that someone else has done (Cambridge Dictionary).

We are witnessing a global rollback of women’s rights and freedoms. Recently, the Latvian Parliament voted to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention, putting Latvia on the path to becoming the second country—after Turkey—to pull out of this systemic framework for women’s rights protection.

How do right-wing groups justify this decision? By opposing the definition of gender as a social construct and the alleged redefining of family values. As Beata Jonite, Head of Advocacy and Policy at the Marta Centre, told Radio Free Europe, the debate was preceded by numerous disinformation campaigns claiming that the Convention would supposedly force people to change their sex; that if parents did not allow their children to “change their gender in kindergarten,” the state would be obliged to take custody away; and that this international agreement would allow men to enter women’s bathrooms. Not only are these arguments unrelated to the content of the Convention, they reveal a trend of scapegoating directed at TGNCI people, whose struggle—and even their very existence—is being demonised. Although all findings indicate that the rates of femicide and violence against women in Turkey have increased since its withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention, this has not been enough to discourage scapegoating as an ideology that blames “minority” groups for global problems. Because clearly, it makes perfect sense to blame trans people for systemic repression and the normalisation of violence against women, doesn’t it?

This, of course, is not the first time that the rights of TGNCI people have been baselessly portrayed as a threat to society. In the context of rising right-wing movements combined with an unprecedented spread of misinformation via social media, blaming TGNCI individuals for the current social climate is in full swing. When authorities wish to divert attention from their own failures and the establishment of harmful, regressive agendas (read: stripping rights from marginalised groups, women, and the modern proletariat), the first step is agitation and the exaggeration of imaginary problems.

Media unethicality is one of the main allies of these de facto enemies of society. If public discourse can be directed toward fear through media narratives, it becomes beneficial for them to make the central news story about the alleged misuse of public restrooms, portraying trans people as predators and rapists—rather than about the real issue of the absence of effective mechanisms for preventing gender-based violence and the dysfunction of the justice system. For scapegoating, the root of the problem and the broader context do not matter, because examining them would reveal the need for systemic reforms and for holding accountable those in positions of power whose negligence is constantly swept under the rug, allowing them to retain unjustly gained wealth and influence for as long as possible. It is far easier to blame a group or person whose marginalised position prevents them from defending themselves. The problem is not the police departments that bury reports of violence in drawers, far from sight and far from mind, nor the judicial system that grants privileges and acquittals to those with the money and influence to erase their crimes from their records—it is the trans person who wants to piss.

“TERF” – A feminist whose advocacy for women’s rights excludes the rights of transgender women (Oxford English Dictionary).

When we want to prevent women from recognising their own power and rising up against oppression, TERF-ism is there to turn them against their allies. As a form of scapegoating, TERF ideology disregards social patterns rooted in patriarchal standards and frames trans people as enemies of women.

“The reality is that there is no definition of ‘woman’ that excludes transgender women without also excluding other minorities among cisgender women. (…) When you zoom out, the problem isn’t transgender people, nor is it feminism—because (TERFs) are certainly not feminists. They want rigid, regressive, sexist guidelines for womanhood for all women, and if you don’t meet them? You’re the enemy, you’re indoctrinating children, etc.”  — Anonymous statement collected through an online questionnaire

TERF ideologies are often portrayed as beneficial for cis women. They exalt “divine femininity,” glorify the role of woman as mother—an experience “a trans woman won’t understand”—and describe women’s safe spaces as something a trans woman would “contaminate.” Yet, at the core of this ideology lies a regressive, patriarchal understanding of womanhood and its social role. A woman is seen primarily as a gamete-bearer, implying that this is her only significant and unique characteristic. If you cannot bear a child, your worth as a human being becomes questionable. By accepting this position, the system will “protect” you from the mythical threat of transgender predators—ensuring that only patriarchal men continue to abuse you.

“The biggest issue (within TERF-ism) is not patriarchy, but the idea that women supposedly need shared experiences based on sex and must stick together; that men cannot be trusted, nor trans women, actually no one. So it’s not only about linking womanhood to sex, but also to victimhood.” — Nora Janković

Not every TERF is motivated by the unattainable promise of patriarchal approval. TERF thinking often masks trauma responses to gender-based violence, creating aversion toward anything masculine. When systemic support dwindles, individuals become trapped in cycles of retraumatisation, searching for justice and for someone to blame. As our interviewee explains: “A traumatised or retraumatised mental state really closes off the possibility of resistance—it pulls you inward. That’s fine during recovery, but it becomes a problem when it turns into a political axis (against men). Whether that pattern extends to trans women depends on personal experiences—of violence, and of contact with trans women.”

In extreme cases, the issue is simply lack of education. Janković recalls one such example from a conference on trans issues where she was a panelist: “What struck me as absurd was when one outspoken TERF advocate, during a discussion on trans women in sports, stood up and said: ‘Bro, if we let trans women swim with cis women, what’s next? Dolphins competing against women?’ It reminded me of homophobia where people say, ‘next comes bestiality’. Luckily, no one else bought into that argument.”

In conversation with long-time Belgrade activist Nora Janković, it becomes clear that the influence of TERF movements extends into the countries of the former Yugoslavia. As someone who directly witnessed the new wave of TERF ideology spreading within primarily leftist and feminist circles in Serbia, her experience illustrates how transfobic narratives are used to obscure real issues and failures in safeguarding women’s rights.

She notes that the spread of TERF ideology began within the collective Marks21, after months of communication issues and the inability of non-dominant members to claim space: “I noticed how some people—especially men, though not exclusively—don’t realise how much they talk. You’d have someone monopolise meetings with their theoretical conclusions and stories about what they’ve read and thought. (…) The only way women could participate was by reproducing these patriarchal communication patterns. Masculinity became the only way to engage in dialogue.”

This underlying misogyny became explicit when certain members began openly expressing sexist views without consequences: “(…) It would be handled by older men, more experienced in feminism, who would talk to individuals openly stating problematic views. They would nod along because, in my experience, men love to ingratiate themselves with someone more dominant. They’ll agree to anything—but once they’re opposite someone they view as less masculine, whether a woman or a gay man, the old record starts playing again.” Is it a coincidence that TERF views began emerging precisely when more people started calling out problematic behaviour by those in power?

Explaining her reasons for leaving the collective, Janković emphasises: “It started with TERF ideology when one of those big talkers shared a text drawing parallels between class, gender, and sex, claiming that just as economic conditions determine class, biological sex determines whether someone is a man or a woman in political practice.” This view was shared by the group’s de facto leader, treated as a symbol of moral authority: “I’m not sure how exactly it began, but I think a woman called him out for unconscious sexism. As the issue of sexism began boiling within the organisation and its leadership, the central question suddenly became whether trans women are women.”

This TERF radicalisation did not occur by accident. Janković explains the reasons behind its spread: “My impression is that TERF-ism was appealing because, especially to those used to classical Marxism, it offered the closest parallel between gender and class, without nuance, without identity questions. Secondly, I absolutely believe they used it to divert attention from their own sexism.”

In an unsurprising turn of events, TGNCI people are not the enemy, and TERF-ism is not the solution: “We’ve long warned that all this panic-mongering, all these debates (even when nothing explicitly transphobic is said) about trans women lead the public to scrutinise who is trans—and many butch women end up being targeted. Trans people have always been here. Before hormones, I used women’s bathrooms countless times, and no one ever had a problem. (TERF-ism) creates a situation where disgust and marginalisation are applied even to cis women. Any politics targeting marginalised groups ultimately erodes all the norms it claims to protect—here, absolutely patriarchal norms.”

Injustice is fought through solidarity. And rebellion. And education. We must not fall into patterns designed to dismantle revolutionary movements. Alignment with patriarchy is not our salvation—but community and understanding are.

“Intersectional feminism matters because everything is connected. Even if you don’t see trans women as real women, the form of our oppression and the ideas behind it are rooted in misogyny and control. There is no law or policy restricting the rights of trans women that does not also threaten all women—or all people. The only benefit of TERF-ism is a Pyrrhic victory based on semantics. Removing hypothetical penises from women’s spaces is an ideological win, not a practical one. And it opens the door to broader abuses through precedent.”  — Anonymous statement collected through an online questionnaire

This article was published with the support of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Ireland. The content of the article is the sole responsibility of the Author(s) and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Tuzla Open Centre, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Ireland, or the Government of Ireland.