It’s time we woke up | TheArticle

When I fret about the modern forms of “identity politics” that dominated the past decade, people who spend more time in the real world and less immersed in journalism, politics and social

media tell me not to worry.

It’s just a fad, they reassure me. Eventually, we’ll treat marginalised groups in a kinder, fairer way. We’ll also find an equilibrium that avoids everyone else being subjected to angry

rhetoric and aggressive advocacy.

In particular, the craze for treating gender as a matter of choice, completely independent of biological sex, will pass. And the demonisation of men as overly privileged potential rapists

will cease.

I have two pre-school boys who will be entering their teenage years by 2030. I don’t want them to have to navigate all the awkwardness and confusion of puberty with the added complication

that every clumsy interaction with the opposite sex could be interpreted as assault.

I don’t want them to be taught that they’re toxic because they’re male. And I don’t want them to have to cope with a world in which basic categories by which we understand things are

dissolved or relegated to a function of personal preference.

Will the next ten years see us get over our current obsession with identity or are things likely to get worse?

The signs are not hopeful. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, in western democracies, we were already living in some of the most diverse and tolerant societies that humanity had

ever known. Many longstanding struggles for acceptance, focused on race, sex and sexuality, seemed to have achieved success.

Just as we became increasingly blind to these categories in our treatment of others, rather than dying down, demands from their most politicised activists intensified. We conceded that their

campaigns for fairness were justified, but then seemed powerless to check outlandish claims for special treatment.

Writers who have wrestled with the modern obsession with personal and political identity have different analyses of why this way of thinking developed. The US political scientist, Francis

Fukuyama, sees it as a distortion of the liberal tradition of universal recognition, with demands focusing on a person’s membership of certain groups, rather than their rights as an

individual. The journalist Douglas Murray emphasises a Marxist project to break down distinctions on which western democracies are based, in order to replace them with something else

entirely.

Whichever view you prefer, we know that obscure jargon and ideas escaped from the fringes of academia and changed our societies with alarming speed. And we haven’t even begun to discuss or

understand whether these changes will be beneficial or damaging. Some of the differences seem relatively benign and some are potentially very serious, but increasingly they intrude on

people’s everyday lives, whether they like it or not.

The pub I frequent in Belfast no longer has ladies’ toilets, to take one trivial example. Next to the gents, women must make do with a “gender-neutral bathroom” which was once reserved

exclusively for their use.

More importantly, our political debate has been shaped profoundly by identity concerns. The last Conservative government consulted on reform to gender recognition laws, favouring a model

that gave each individual an absolute right to choose his or her own gender, without meeting tests, medical or otherwise. Choice alone would determine whether someone should be treated as

male, female or one of a bewildering range of neologisms that describe something “in between”.

These reforms are less likely to form part of the new government’s programme, but the fact that Tory ministers advocated such radical policies shows how pervasive the notion has become that

the “woke” agenda is justified and necessary.

The number of people, prominent or otherwise, whose careers have been destroyed because they disputed these new orthodoxies, or were insufficiently familiar with the language they demand,

has accelerated. In politics, academia and almost every other walk of life, those who hold different views or can’t keep up with identity politics’ terminology have been subject to campaigns

that have cost them their jobs.

Many of these campaigns were prosecuted first on social media, where fringe identity politics have become mainstream. We’re only beginning to study how new technology is changing the way we

think, but, the trend for earnest young people to announce their preferred pronouns online, for example, hardly suggests it discourages an unhealthy preoccupation with personal recognition.

It’s tempting to talk about “identity politics” and “wokeness” as if they formed a coherent view of the world, but actually they’re riven with problems and contradictions.

They put an individual’s subjective experience on a pedestal and insist they are exactly who they say they are, but at the same time, they rely upon defining exclusive groups that cannot be

joined or understood from the outside. They encourage a sense of victimhood and trigger competition between competing grievances.

Feminists believe that gender roles have been imposed by a powerful patriarchy, while some trans campaigners claim that boys who play with dolls may actually be girls, meaning they require

powerful doses of drugs and surgery.

Reading round these subjects, you quickly fall down rabbit-holes of the densest, most nonsensical political jargon — yet we seem unable, for the time being, to pull ourselves out of this

madness. But there is hope. While identity politics are pervasive on social media, they still seem strange and silly to many people in the real world.

Perhaps some of the excesses of woke culture really will be tempered by the common-sense pragmatism of those who don’t spend too much time on Twitter. Otherwise, faddish ideas about identity

will continue to shape our politics and law, with consequences that will almost certainly create a more divided, unhappier society.

By proceeding, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and our Privacy Policy.

If an account exists for this email address, you will shortly receive an email from us. You will then need to:

Please note, this link will only be valid for 24 hours. If you do not receive our email, please check your Junk Mail folder and add info@thearticle.com to your safe list.