Be Kind 2.0 and the "Persuasive TRA"

had a strong performance in all eight categories: leadership, empowering individuals, employee network groups, the employee lifecycle, policies and benefits, monitoring, supply chains and external engagement.

the employee lifecycle
What??

supply chains
Oh, are we back to all companies having to be pure or they go under? That was extremely sinister last time and definitely worth watching out for. "We can't do business with you unless you get ranked higher" is coercion.

Well given some of the posts on her advocating that women and girls should undress in front of men, should not be allowed an opinion, should reframe their trauma from sexual abuse and rape and aren't worthy of the rights to privacy, dignity nor safeguarded with the consent of consent because men say so that's one hell of a claim.

I imagine the handbook could be well written by trans widows, as the emerging pattern looks like a macro level of what they experience at the micro level.

This is really weird, paranoid - and, incidentally, deeply offensive to DV survivors like me. Especially today, as Natalie McNally's killer is sentenced.

Treating minorities like they're conspiracies against you is genuinely worrying behaviour.

Trans people are normal human beings, with full lives, jobs and relationships. Some are trans men, some trans women, others are non-binary.

Dehumanising them like this, inventing really odd scenarios and weaponising the language of domestic violence, is not normal behaviour.

Fine, congratulate yourself. Still one of the most breathtakingly ignorant, offensive and quite frankly paranoid things I've ever read. And I've still got Christmas cards from my in-laws.

Fine, congratulate yourself. Still one of the most breathtakingly ignorant, offensive and quite frankly paranoid things I've ever read. And I've still got Christmas cards from my in-laws.

Thank you for so clearly showcasing the emotionally manipulative tactics used by transactivists to criticise / silence women talking about the erosion of women's rights and child safeguarding.

Perfect 👏👏👏

This is really weird, paranoid - and, incidentally, deeply offensive to DV survivors like me. Especially today, as Natalie McNally's killer is sentenced.

Treating minorities like they're conspiracies against you is genuinely worrying behaviour.

Trans people are normal human beings, with full lives, jobs and relationships. Some are trans men, some trans women, others are non-binary.

Dehumanising them like this, inventing really odd scenarios and weaponising the language of domestic violence, is not normal behaviour.

This is a spinoff from another thread so as not to derail the original.

I thought it would be helpful to have a separate thread to discuss, and document, a phenomenon I have been seeing more regularly recently: the Persuasive TRA.

It occurred to me, after a few posters noted that the recent U-turns by a couple of politicians, and the wheedling TRA responses to the EHRC guidance, were akin to an abuser changing tactics and also asking us to "help" them in the new single-sex regime, that the whole thing is starting to pan out exactly as an abusive relationship often does. When is the most dangerous time for a woman in an abusive relationship? Normally, when she is leaving.

Well, women are leaving the abusive relationship with non-reality that men forced upon us some 15 years ago, and I would argue that now might be our most dangerous/difficult moment.

This is what I posted on the other thread:

I'm starting to see a bit more of what I am calling (in my own head) "Persuasive TRA." Now that they have lost everything that they bullied women for, some activists seem to be changing tack. Women must now fix the situation that TRAs have found themselves in. It seems to pivot on a sort of Be Kind 2.0.

I think women who have been in the game long enough will see through it, but we should be watchful. Stonewall is pivoting, activists are pivoting, and they will be preying on women's socialized kindness: watch for the destination and be on your guard.

I have read several posters on different threads appealing to everyone (women) to help calm trans-identified people's (men's) fears about what this new reality will look like, what it will mean for them (the men) now that they can't just do whatever they want anymore. What about the men's toilets? Are they safe? Where will they go? (Who will fix this problem?)

Well, apparently it is a problem that women can fix, if they just take a moment to think about it. Trans-identified men will be unsafe in the men's, so women need to join the fight to give these men something of their own.

Notice the pivot? The pleading? If you just... If you weren't so.... It can be different if you just... Sound familiar? To any woman who is in, or has escaped from, an abusive relationship, this will be all too familiar.

This is Be Kind 2.0. It's very similar to the original, except that instead of being forced to enjoy our abuse, we are being asked to fix it. And the "Persuasive TRAs" seem to be mobilizing, from what I have seen.

It won't start in the middle (with the women); it will start at the top (infiltrating government, think tanks, charities, etc.) and the bottom (schools). But they will use women to get this moving. Why not? It worked so well last time. And I believe that organizations like Stonewall will be leading the charge: the campaign can be something like Safe Spaces for Trans+ : All of Us Together.

If anyone else has seen this in action, it might be useful to keep a record of it here.

I imagine this thread will eventually be taken over by activists, but, until then, I would be interested in your thoughts.

Yes, I have noticed that as well, and remarked about it on a couple of threads recently, but the word salad being presented was just impenetrable to me (I suppose that's the point), so I still don't really understand it. It seems to be lifted from some new rule book. Must keep an eye out for it again!

This is an example of what I was referring to earlier, where the argument is ostensibly favouring women but the framing’s that the focus on toilets as a single sex space is a kind of lesser/silly bone of contention.

Apparently written by Paul Knaggs but reads AI to me.
‘it makes women’s objections appear mean, petty, almost obsessive’
’purpose built, universally accessible facilities would solve the practical problem of provision’
Is that so Sir?

Nowhere in the article is the importance of single sex toilets mentioned.

Perhaps Paul Knaggs heart is in the right place but trans activists really really want access to female toilets and it’s the weak point where they believe they can gain traction with their ‘just want to pee’ sad faces. At recent marches the placards all pointed in this direction.

Toilets are the most straightforward way to visibly intrude on women and girls, they’re where the greatest number will be affected, they’re the most readily available, they’re an incredibly intimate female space associated not just with obvious bodily functions but also menstruation, fixing you hair and make up, mirrors….

From a safeguarding perspective though they are the potential opening to so many harms, indignities, crimes and fetishistic behaviour. Absolutely crucially they’re the space where young girls are most likely to have their boundaries blurred or become confused as to who is safe or not.

I’m really wary of narratives diminishing the importance of toilets as a single sex space.
All single sex spaces matter.

Labour Heartlands: the conjuring trick at the toilet door

“I don't see a rush by TRAs to fix maternity services”
**
Remember when they began their push for “period poverty”? How popular is that cause now? You’ve pointed out a potential new pathway for them. It will be interesting to see if that one gets picked up.

I suspect not, because they are currently in damage control. They adopted new tactics after the Supreme Court (the most successful being to wait for the guidance). Now they are moving into a new phase, which may be simply defiance of law and guidance (“impossible to apply”) but might also pivot back to 2015 when they decided to try to change the EA to remove women’s rights altogether. Or it may be something else. Too early to call what the predominant campaign will be.

Thanks OP for starting this useful thread. I’m less in this campaign and less on Twix than I used to be, so hadn’t noticed the trend you mentioned, but it’s undoubtedly in the mix. I think it will only be a matter of time before we see which new tactic will predominate. They’re just trying a few out and will pursue the one that they find most appealing. Fortunately for us, the one they choose is rarely one that is persuasive to those on the fence because they have no real sense of what the public will tolerate and certainly no idea of what will be popular for normal people.

Gay rights were achieved by campaigners who worked out what would be acceptable to most people and worked from there. The current push towards normalization of perversion and to claim men are literally women have both been less successful in achieving what they set out to. Personally, I hope that continues and they miss their mark and fail to get what they want, like PIE ultimately did in the 70s.

Mens issues are theirs to fix. I don't see a rush by TRAs to fix maternity services (which aren't purely about their own validation). Giving birth being the most dangerous day in a woman's life and has substantially worse stats than murdered transwomen in the UK.

So frankly they can fuck off.

This, I've seen this a lot. That "gender policing" will impact females.

@BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth the other tactic that's appearing is trying to make out this will be a bad thing for "cis" women _ how more masculine women will get attacked and thrown out of the ladies. Once again, they think we're daft, I know a woman when I see one

To borrow a quote that is as old as democracy "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance".