Knowledges: Anti-Gender Politics and Education (S01E01)

What are the barriers to gender and sexual equality in higher education?

What happens when “science,” “common sense,” and “neutrality” become political weapons?

In this episode of Dialogues for Resistance, we explore how anti-gender politics targets knowledge itself: universities, classrooms, research, equality work, and the people who make these spaces more inclusive. We ask why gender and sexuality scholarship is so often framed as “ideology,” while anti-gender actors present their own moral and political claims as objective truth.

From Poland to Germany and Hungary, we look at how these struggles reshape academic freedom, institutional safety, and everyday life — through complaints, censorship, intimidation, policy pressure, and attacks on equality work.

But this is not only a story of backlash. It is also a story of resistance: of educators, researchers, students, and activists using policies, alliances, and solidarity to keep knowledge open, critical, and alive.

Listen in to understand why the battle over knowledge is never just academic — and why defending it matters to us all.

Keywords: epistemics, HEI, DEI, inclusive education, Gender Equality Plans, academia, gender equality, LGBTIQ+ rights

Episode Citation: Kulpa, R., & Zabrzewska, A. (2026). Knowledges: Anti-Gender Politics and Education (S01E01). Podcasting Social Justice: Dialogues for Resistances (Podcast Series). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22044884

CITING THE PODCAST SERIES:

Kulpa, R., & Zabrzewska, A. (2026). Podcasting Social Justice: Dialogues for Resistances (Podcast Series). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21676257

Transcript

0:02

Welcome. You’re listening to Dialogues for Resistance — a podcast series about“anti-gender politics” and queer feminist resistances. I am Roberto Kulpa, and I am Ada Zabrzewska. In the podcast, we examine everyday-life consequences of‘anti-gender’ in parliaments, in the press, across civil society, and the institutions that shape people’s lives. In this season 1, we stay close to lived experience. We ask how “anti-gender” politics reshapes ordinary life, what it does to safety, belonging, and access to care. We trace how the same politics travels across borders: through migration regimes and the everyday violences that gather at Europe’s edges — alongside the solidarities people build to survive and to resist. Hello everyone! So, the question we’d like to ask in today’s episode is: how do“anti-gender” actors fight over knowledge? And what does that do to academic life, to policy, and to the people who are trying to make higher education safer and more equal? Yes, you're right Rob. Because universities are not just places where knowledge happens but also places where knowledge is governed. Who gets to research, who gets to teach, who gets funding, who gets harassed, who gets protected — all of that is political. And in “anti-gender” mobilisations, knowledge itself becomes a target.<break time="1.3s" /> So, let’s start with a basic question for you Rob: why do these knowledge wars matter? And who should care? Ha! We're starting with big guns! Knowledge matters because when“anti-gender” actors speak about“science” and “nature”, they’re not just having an academic disagreement. They're trying to decide what can be said in public, what counts as legitimate expertise, and whose lives are treated as livable. Totally! And the impact doesn’t stay inside lecture theatres. It travels into schools, into media, courtrooms, and hospitals — and into peoples’ everyday lives. If you’re queer, trans, a woman seeking reproductive healthcare, a researcher in gender studies or feminist theory, or someone teaching about safe sex, consent or sexuality, the outcome of'anti-gender' disputes is not abstract. It is felt as surveillance, insecurity, and the shrinking of ordinary freedoms. Our research project captured a significant shift: “anti-gender” actors increasingly claim that they have scientific proof against what they call“gender ideology”, while framing gender and sexuality scholarship as ideological, biased, and untrustworthy. That is a clever reversal. They portray themselves as neutral — and they push their opponents into the corner of “irrational” or “immoral”. And you know what? That sets up a paradox. People working for gender equality in universities and civil society have to do two things at once: they have to counter pseudo-scientific claims that are deployed to defend moral positions, and they have to defend themselves against the accusation that they are the ones driven by ideology.

Exactly. So the question becomes: 3:25

when someone says “this is just common sense” or “this is just biology” - what are they trying to say? Do we have any examples here for our listners?<break time="1.3s" /> Sure Rob. Let’s make that more concrete. In the Polish context, RESIST mapped a set of “anti-gender” strategies, and a significant chunk of them relates to knowledge production. And that means organising or platforming 'gender critical' conferences and webinars; launching new information channels; or producing materials such as leaflets and guidlines. Right. So they are shaping narratives through media; spreading misinformation; and filing formal and informal complaints against educational institutions and staff? Exactly! What makes this tactic powerful is that it looks respectable. It can be presented as “public debate”, “free inquiry”, “defending academic standards”. But often it works like a pressure system, a strategy that creates risk. And we heard that from people inside higher education institutions. Yes, the RESIST interviews and focus groups that you have mentioned, clearly describe the atmosphere produced by this pressure: intimidation, institutional caution, and, sometimes, direct interference by political or religious figures in how universities operate.

And we should say: 4:52

this isn’t only a Polish story. Isn't it right Roberto? Urgh, unfortunately you're right. In Germany, equality trainers and public educators described contracts being withdrawn after complaints from parents or local politicians, and a stark lack of institutional procedures to protect staff from coordinated attacks. One educator put it bluntly: on a construction site you’d get a helmet, but in this work there is “no protection at all”. So we’re not talking about “disagreement” as such. We’re talking about a politics that tries to make gender and sexual equality administratively unsafe, difficult, or even impossible to implement. Yes, so for one example of how that“administrative” pressure can harden into law, it’s enough to look at Hungary under Viktor Orban. Gender studies programmes were banned in 2018. Legal gender recognition for trans people was abolished in 2020. And the 2021 so-called“Child Protection Law” restricts depictions of queer people in schools and children’s media — with censorship becoming routinised, down to bookshops wrapping books in plastic foil.... It's a grimm story, isn't it? Unfortunately...<break time="0.8s" /> But there is also a story of resilience here, and it is worth naming with some care. People do not simply endure these pressures in silence, because many of them become inventive and deliberate about how they keep their work for gender and sexual equality alive. You're absolutly right Ada! From inside universities they build alliances with colleagues and students, and they make even small institutional tools do real work, not because the system is generous but because they refuse to let it be the only author of what is possible. Let me give you a concrete example - Gender Equality Plans. In many places these plans are treated as compliance documents, the kind of thing you file to meet requirements and then forget, but the RESIST findings show people inside institutions actively repurposing them. They use them as a foothold for conversations and procedures on gender based violence, harassment, and the everyday invisibility of queer and trans students. They turn a document into something that can actually change practice. Another thing that comes to my mind is how much this work depends on people noticing small openings and then acting together. Participants describe situations where management simply does not pay attention, and that neglect can become the space in which people quietly build support systems and do what is necessary. Another thing that comes up to my mind, is how much this work depends on people noticing small openings and then acting together. Participants describe situations where management simply does not pay attention, and that neglect can become the space in which people quietly build support systems and do what is necessary. Of course, that is not an ideal model because it pushes responsibility onto individuals and it can lead to exhaustion, but it is still a real strategy for making institutions more livable in hostile climates. And there is also the role of European equality and diversity frameworks. They are not designed as direct countermeasures to anti gender mobilisation, but they can operate as a practical buffer, because they give people language standards and obligations that can be cited when a national or local environment becomes hostile. In other words, they can help people argue that inclusion is not an optional preference, but a responsibility that institutions have already signed up to.<break time="1.3s" /> OK. Shall we wrap up with a few takeaways?

My first would be: 8:58

“anti-gender” politics often works through knowledge production through conferences, information channels, training sessions, complaints, and pseudo-neutral claims to science.

Sure! I would say the second takeaway is: 9:12

we shouldn't underestimate the way“neutrality” is performed. When one side claims to be factual and the other to be“ideological”, that’s not a description. It’s a strategy to close down debate — and to delegitimise entire fields of expertise.

And the third: 9:31

resistance is already happening inside universities. People reuse imperfect policies, leverage external frameworks, and build solidarity networks that make equality work possible— even under pressure.

Which reminds us: 9:50

academic freedom is not only a legal principle. It’s also a lived condition — sustained by relationships, mutual support, and the courage to keep teaching, researching, and caring for students. Thanks for listening. Thank you.<break time="1.3s" /> You’ve listened to Dialogues for Resistance — a podcast series about how“anti-gender politics” travels, and how queer feminist resistances answer back. In this season we follow those dynamics across Europe — and you have just listened to an episode on the knowledge wars around gender, sexuality, and higher education. Check out the other episodes of this season, and don’t forget to listen to the next season, where we focus on how“anti-gender” politics takes shape in Poland.