Marguerite Stern: From Femen Activism to the Debate on Feminism and Sexual Identity

Marguerite Stern’s trajectory has become emblematic of the tensions running through part of French feminism. A former member of Femen, later known for feminist poster campaigns denouncing femicide, she gradually found herself at odds with certain collectives and activists from her former political milieu. At the heart of the disagreement is the place of gender identity in feminism and the very definition of the category of “woman.”

This evolution has led her detractors to label her transphobic or place her on the far right, while others praise her determination to defend an approach to feminism based on biological sex. These opposing interpretations above all reveal a broader ideological conflict, in which language, alliances, and political boundaries have become unstable.

From Femen to poster campaigns against femicide

Marguerite Stern first came to public attention when she joined Femen in 2010, at the age of 20. This activist movement notably uses spectacular action and nudity as forms of protest. In 2014, she appeared outside the Paris court in a case linked to an action at the Church of La Madeleine.

In 2019, she launched feminist poster campaigns against femicide. Displayed in public spaces, these messages spread to many French cities and became one of the most recognizable visual signs of mobilization against violence against women.

Her path therefore began within an activist feminism that was radical both in its forms of action and in its critique of sexist violence. It is precisely this background that has made her break with part of the feminist movement particularly widely discussed.

The conflict over the terms “cis,” “TERF,” and “woman”

In January 2020, controversy erupted over a poster bearing the phrase “Sisters, not cis TERFs.” In activist vocabulary, “cis” generally refers to a person whose gender identity corresponds to the sex assigned to them at birth. The term “TERF” is an acronym for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, used to describe—often polemically—feminists who refuse to include trans women in the category of women.

Marguerite Stern then criticized what she regarded as an excessive place given to trans demands within the feminist struggle. This position led to a distancing from part of the movement she had helped organize around the poster campaigns. Along with other activists, she stated that she wanted to maintain a biological definition of woman.

The disagreement is not only about words. It involves concrete issues: the organization of single-sex spaces, women’s political representation, statistics on violence, and the ability to conceive of rights specifically linked to the female sex. For so-called gender-critical feminists, no longer being able to define women on the basis of biology weakens the defense of those rights. Conversely, trans activists and their supporters consider that this approach excludes trans women and contributes to their marginalization.

“Femellism,” an attempt at repositioning

Alongside Dora Moutot, Marguerite Stern took part in launching a manifesto claiming the term “femellism.” In their approach, the term refers to a feminism that defines a woman as a human being of the female sex. For its proponents, it is a matter of returning to a feminism centered on the sexed body and on the material realities experienced by women.

This orientation presents itself as a critique of gender ideology while distinguishing itself from general hostility toward trans people. Marguerite Stern and Dora Moutot say they are targeting an ideology or political demands rather than individuals themselves. However, this distinction is challenged by their opponents, who believe that the practical consequences of their positions directly affect trans people.

Femellism thus finds itself in a difficult position. It rejects the idea that declared identity alone is sufficient to define sex, but it does not necessarily identify with conservative or anti-feminist currents. This intermediate position exposes its advocates to criticism from several sides: accused by some of betraying feminism, they are also challenged by those who see radical feminism as a theory incompatible with their view of relations between the sexes.

Why this break disrupts political divides

Marguerite Stern’s trajectory illustrates a realignment of alliances around questions of sex, gender, and feminism. Figures or media outlets usually distant from feminism may amplify the positions of activists critical of gender identity. Conversely, these activists may be rejected by progressive organizations with which they were previously associated.

This realignment does not mean that disagreements disappear. A feminist committed to the biological definition of women may continue to defend analyses very different from those of conservative circles on family, sexuality, equality, or social roles. Likewise, a shared opposition to certain trans demands is not enough to create a shared doctrine.

One of the central points of disagreement is the following question: does recognizing biological differences between men and women necessarily mean endorsing differentiated social roles? Some argue that it is possible to distinguish biological sex from individual freedom without assigning women a particular function. Others believe that sex differences inevitably have psychological and social effects, and that feminism cannot ignore them. The debate remains open and deeply contentious.

A debate over the definition and protection of women

Marguerite Stern’s case therefore goes beyond her personal trajectory alone. It highlights a central question for contemporary feminism: how can women be defended as a sex-based group while taking the demands of trans people into account? The answers differ according to feminist currents, conceptions of equality, and political priorities.

For gender-critical feminists, the issue is preserving legal and political categories based on sex. For advocates of trans inclusion, the issue is ensuring that trans people are neither excluded nor reduced to their sex at birth. Between these two approaches, dialogue is often made difficult by polarization, mutual accusations, and the use of highly charged terms.

Marguerite Stern embodies this divide because she comes from a visible feminist activism and chose to challenge some of its recent developments. Her trajectory shows that political affiliations are not fixed: the same person can retain certain feminist commitments while breaking with the ideological frameworks of their former camp.

FAQ

Why has Marguerite Stern become a controversial figure?

She is controversial because of her critical positions on the integration of trans demands into feminism. Her detractors accuse her of transphobia, while she defends a biological definition of the category of “woman.”

What is femellism?

Femellism is the name given to a feminist approach advocated notably by Marguerite Stern and Dora Moutot. It holds that women should be defined on the basis of biological sex and seeks to preserve a feminism centered on that reality.

Does the debate simply pit the left against the right?

No. Positions on sex, gender, and feminism cut across the usual political divides. Feminists historically positioned on the left may oppose certain trans demands without necessarily sharing all the positions of the right or conservative movements.