Based on the upvote/downvote ratio on my posts in the subreddit, I don't think intactivists are more likely than the general public to be "anti-woke". That stands in tension with the also-true observation that some intactivists have some highly regressive beliefs: misogyny, antisemitism, racism, egocentrism.
I set out to understand the community and found that it is both heterogenous and hotly contested. And, some (most?) of that contest falls along the -isms mentioned above.
"Marotta appears to be one of King's indifferent whites, happy to adopt a color blind mindset but not happy when oppressed people demand more than mere access and opportunity. Now, if Marotta so badly misrepresents MLK Jr. in just the first few pages of his book, are you curious about what else Marotta has misrepresented?"
How To Deradicalize a Movement
by Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon
"As you can see, Marotta’s antisemitism is inclusive. He draws on the past with some old Christian anti-Jewish theology (Jewish as an adjective in the phrase “Jewish Justice”), but he also serves up a perverse misapplication of critical theory which he clumsily attempts to weaponize against an entire people’s identity."
@TheConversationUS
In the 19th century, Reform considered giving up Milah (infant male genital cutting) - but not the idea of a Brit (covenant with Gd). Modern understanding of human rights and sexual equality keeps the issue alive. www.bruchim.online
The 20th Century US "medical" fad of "crcmcs**n" - now residual in the rest of the English-speaking world - is an anomaly. www.circumstitions.com #intactivism
Yet with AB768, the state of California specifically denies and interferes with an individual’s reproductive freedom - long prior to his ability to reproduce - in his most intimate decision, whether he may keep his own foreskin.
And they gutted a Bill about climate change to do it!
I mention this only because the Amendment is worded in such general terms - including being gender-neutral - that it becomes relevant.