On the framing strategies of the transnational anti-gender movement: lifting the lid off the "new" language of mobilization

In recent years, the globe has witnessed the proliferation of social mobilizations referred as anti-gender movement that organize against gender ideology, gender theory, or genderism. The anti-gender actors mobilize against several issues including women's rights, reproductive rights, gender equality, LGBTQ+ orientations, identities, and rights, sexual education programs, and gender studies in general. From mid-2000s onwards, national anti-gender mobilizations gradually transformed into a transnational movement mobilizing masses across the world. Acknowledging the importance of transnational character and discursive strategies of the anti-gender movement behind the mobilizational strength of the movement as the relevant literature suggests, this study focuses on the discourses and framing strategies of two transnational anti-gender NGOs, namely Human Life International and International Organization for the Family both of which are among the biggest transnationally organized NGOs around the anti-gender agenda. This study examines the discourse of transnational anti-gender NGOs through the questions of: How do transnational actors with anti-gender goals, discursively frame their agendas so that they can appeal to wider publics? How do anti-gender actors draw "us" versus "them" boundaries via the frames they apply to justify their positions? What do these discursive frames tell us about the proliferation of anti-gender ideas with their mobilizational power? Via application of frame analysis to published documents of the two organizations, this study confirms the relevant literature that anti-gender actors adopt secular language via co-optation of science, democracy, freedom, human rights, and anti-colonialism frames to justify their arguments. However, this study finds that the most dominant frames used by anti-gender actors still remains morality, natural and religious order frames across main issues of anti-gender agenda, namely, abortion, birth control, LGBTQ+, and family & marriage. The selection, adoption and usage of the frames have implications of anti-gender actors' identification of themselves and characterization of their 'others'. This study finds that the actors also usually utilize morality and religious order frames when constructing their own identities and the characterization of others. Thus, anti-gender arguments tend to bring out discussions on faith and values rather than ideas while engaging in an active enemy creation. The dominance of morality and religious order frames both in the identification of problems and solutions of the agenda and "us" versus "them" constructions would explain a part of mobilizational power of anti-gender discourse. Because via morality and religious order frames, anti-gender actors could unify their recruits around an 'us' identified by having common moral and religious sensitivities against a common enemy that seek to attack these sensitivities.