Open letter to a friend who thinks transwomen are women

Yes absolutely. Things become polarised so easily, and wrongly.

Misogyny is good at making baddies of women though, and we have that prejudice to overcome before we even get a chance to be fun and engaging.

Perhaps we need to make more of working towards the utopian vision where women are no longer at risk of violence or sexism. But it is easier to help a few trans people feel happy than undo millennia of misogyny and it makes our cause less appealling and less satisfying to some.

I have met a lot of well-meaning people in the last few years due to our challening circs and sadly the majority proved to be clueless about the real world, biased and irrationally optimistic, and therefore no help at all, and worse started to blame me and crticise me for not trying hard enough or not wanting to help myself when their 'just do this' unrealistic hope based non-solutions didn't immediately fix the problem. Quite narcisstic really. Funny how even 'nice' people can turn on you if you unintentionally challenge their world view.

Sometimes well-meaning is just lazy and/or self-serving.

But oops, must stay 'warm' and not be pessimistic.

Don't forget that all but a tiny minority who support the TRA position are entirely well meaning, good people who want to do the right thing by others.

They are not bad people.

By the same token the vast majority of those who are gender critical also come from a similar mindset. They don't want to see people harmed by others or the victim of prejudice.

Their end goal is ultimately very similar.

The difference is largely grounded in experience of reality over ideological idealism which neglects to acknowledge the minority who wish to exploit this good intent.

The good versus evil narrative is a really unhelpful one.

Thank you for sharing that wisdom redtoothbrush. It is easy to see everyone as machiavellian sometimes, but as you say, sometimes their position is not logic based, and nor do they necessarly want to do the work or have their eyes opened.

Ignorance is bliss as they say.

I saw somethng on telly the other day that used the fable of the North Wind and the Sun and it got me thinking in the fable they both want a man to remove his coat and the North WInd blew coder and colder and theman clutched his coat ever harder, the sun however beamed down warm rays and the man quickly and happily removed his coat.

I think the TRAs etc use and benefit from the sun approach as they are able (through some duplicitousness) rainbows and unicorns and glitter, to frame their agenda as being inclusive and non-hateful and liberal etc, to give people a way to feel warm and good and kind, and maybe even to believe that the world is safe. Maybe we need that when actually there is still so much wrong and sometimes few answers.

After that, we feminists look like the cold wind, forcing peple to open their eyes and see badness and risk everywhere, and being angry arguing women. Boo for feminists. In my case, I even object to pink princess dresses for girls. How mean and dull.

I haven't heard it yet, but from the comments, I think this is where Dr Julia Long was able to be particularly effective in her radio interview as many PP mentioned that she came across as almost lighthearted and funny, and yet very focussed on women and not argue-y, and of course this was helped by not having a biased interview setting her as the baddie from the start and making her feel she had to fight to be heard.

We need to find more ways to be like the warm Sun.

I tried to read it all but it was a bit waffly and long winded.

Remembering that accidentally switching your keyboard off, is not very helpful.

As I was saying, remembering not trying to alienate the opposite side is crucial to the conciliation and the reconciliation process.

Anger and creating anger is only helpful in certain ways; you also need to understand how to do the opposite in order to progress and bring people along with you. The alternative is to force them against their will, which does not end ignorance nor prejudice.

I don't know if RedToothbrush has been suspended for six weeks, has taken a break or something else.
I'm 100% still here. No ban or suspension or anything else. Just taking a bit of a twitter / MN break over the summer for my sanity.

In terms of 'breaking the cult' I think no it doesn't work. People who are that involved aren't going to listen. They have already made up their minds. Changing someone's mind is a difficult thing to do. The stronger the opinion the harder it is to get through. Its not just about the opinion but how that opinion sits with your identity and sense of pride.

But if its an open letter, its not just directed at being read by a single individual. Whilst its about an individual, its supposed to be read by lots of people.

The silent reader who does have an opinion which is much less rigid and fixed. And those are people you can influence.

Whether thats 'fair' is another matter. There is a certain amount of passive aggressiveness in writing about someone who you know has said they are not interested in the conversation and making it 'an open letter'. Open letters about people are possibly not good manners and aren't going to endeer you to a whole bunch of people - which might rather undermine the point you were trying to make in the first place.

So it does serve a purpose, but its not really intended to be only for the eyes of the friend whom its about and definitely has some problems in achieving its goal of being persuasive to people who are not already gender critical. It has the effect of being more likely to be preaching to the converted instead.

Changing someone's mind is a long process. The wisdom of this generally as follows:

1. The mistake is to assume that people have opinions based on facts and logic rather than emotion.
2. The more evidence you provide therefore doesn't necessarily mean it will change opinions; indeed it can often have the opposite effect and cause people to switch off, get their backs up or otherwise not want to engage.
3. You need to get people on side and find common ground first. Agreeing with someone about certain shared values and goals is hugely important to establish a new direction of conversation.
4. You then can reframe the issue from how it has been initially presented. Come in from a different angle. Put emphasis in a different way or an area of concern which you both share. If you do this you can have a different conversation and a different debate where views are not entrenched in the same way.
5. Introducing alterative explanations or outcomes or solutions to the problem then becomes possible. Again this provides a way to reframe the debate and doesn't go over the same ground over and over again.
6. This is all about trying to get people to 'think' again rather than just repeat the same things they have been taught. This is why you'll see a pattern in trying to return certain subjects to ground which is well trodden - like toilets. Give people the opportunity to repeat well known slogans, just means they remain in the same safe rut of a lack of thinking.
7. Providing a way to save face or climb down without compromising themselves or their values is essential. 'Its not as simplistic as it appears on the surface' is a good starting point to this as well as stressing that you understand the thought process of being supportive of the trans agenda.

Rememberi

Agree Lang

The letter is written for a particular audience. It will not resonate with everyone.

Great letter and all part of the growing rich tapestry of feminist thinking. We need letters like this just as much as we need stickerwomen, ManFriday, the Daily Mail, JonnyBest and WPUK etc.
We need to speak to everyone - and make them bloody listen.

Nobody is saying don't share it. I offered an opinion, you don't agree, do as you please.

This reminded me of CS Lewis’ argument that Jesus was either Lunatic, Liar, or Lord. Like CS Lewis, this activist excluded another possibility: simply being mistaken, which is where I sit.

I think this is both overly kind (especially with regards to middle class activists who will not see the inherent classism in throwing the most vulnerable women under the bus) and also true. I like the reference: it made me think.

It is nonsense to suggest that nuanced arguments like this won't win hearts and minds. They will win some hearts and minds. Just like the robust humour of ManFriday or penis stickers will win some hearts and minds. Dismissing useful work because it doesn't chime with your own personal preferences for activism or political argument - that is saying GC feminism should be a monolith.

I didn't understand.

I appreciate the argument, that the author can write and that TWANW.

It is not a style that holds my attention or that I enjoy.

If you are trying to change hearts and minds, you need to reach as many people as possible and hold their attention or you are alone talking to the wind.

The content of the piece seems fine. However, I don't like open letters seemingly directed to an individual.

Well I did to that what I do to many TRA pieces, I read a few paragraphs and stopped. I found it dull to read.

Not everyone likes the same authors and genres of book.

This person can write, I agree TWANW, they don't write in a style that holds my interest.

When did GC feminists become the borg and not allowed to hold a critical opinion?

"The ‘born in the wrong body’ idea goes beyond poststructuralist ideas about gender into quasi-religious terrain. How can anyone have an innate, pre-experience knowledge of what it means to be the other sex? What does that even entail? Being male or female refers to your reproductive sex. To argue otherwise is akin to arguing for gendered souls."

This is what had always got me: the idea of innate gender which, in reality, is just a faith based belief system. I can understand that some people are repulsed by their body (and there are many expressions of this) or feel worthless and self-loathing. But these people are insisting on acceptance of metaphysics as science and harking back to crass Victorian biological essentialism and notions of feminine essence.

It didn't hold my attention either. Lacked substance. It was DM quality writing. Not borderline illiterate but lacking anything particularly interesting. Analogies were a bit clumsy and arguments were wishy washy. Little evidence of anything.

Oh, I like that....

Good letter

I always think Tanith writes with great clarity and patience. This article is excellent. But I bet it doesn't get the fawning that Jonny Best's article did. Wonder why?

Welcome to Mumsnet, Accidents! Interesting first posts!

Women cant win.
If we are passionate we are perceived as hysterical, and are told we need to write using calm logic and facts to support our argument.
When we do that we are boring and can't hold peoples attention.

It completely held my attention.

What a calm, compassionate and intelligent letter.