Making room to say, "I was wrong"

[PersistenceIsNotFutile]

This idea isn't fully formed, so maybe others can help me.

I am seeing a lot of comments along the lines of "we won't forget you threw women under the bus" or "you're a failure for not seeing this in advance" and so on.

Doesn't this push people into a corner, without giving them room to change their minds? I've seen many people in my life, when pushed hard enough, utterly refuse to engage and admit when they made a wrong choice. They just double down, and never change, even when presented with reams of evidence that they made the wrong choice.

Don't we want our politicians to have that space to say they misjudged the situation, or listened to incorrect guidance?

And now I've lost my train of thought...

I understand what you are saying and don't disagree. After all, you give children the space to say, "I'm sorry.

Except that...

Don't we want our politicians to have that space to say they misjudged the situation, or listened to incorrect guidance?

I think the issue/concern is that many of them probably know this already and are willfully listening to abusive men/ignoring genuine concerns of women.

Their apologies won't be sincere. They aren't even listening to us.

Unfortunately you are probably right.

I think it's quite helpful to rub someone's nose in reality, and force them to think things through. They don't give a shit about women, they're basking in the glow of being so enlightened and caring, and they're doing it because they think it reflects well on them. Fuck them. Let them know it will all rebound on them when the shit hits the fan.

What’s your suggested method for getting them to change, OP?
So far, logical and reasoned argument has failed. Ditto being polite, offering a third space, etc.
The only thing that really focuses MPs minds is the risk of losing votes. Hence the need to make clear that we will not forget this at the ballot box.
The only problem is finding any party that WILL take women’s safety seriously.

No, I'm really glad you raised this.

So often, people are shamed for changing their minds. Its considered weak. Defeated.

And so often we are tempted to gloat when we "win" or score a P.O.

Ugh, pressed return too soon.

We are tempted to gloat when we "win" or score a "point" in a debate.

We need to talk about our own experiences of changing our minds, and we need to allow others to save face.

And keep everything polite, to enable all that.

Often difficult!

I totally agree OP. It's very important to give people the leeway to back away from the ideology now. Many of us had to do the same at some point.

The transactivist narrative has changed completely in recent years. From 'let's support people with a diagnosis of dysphoria' to ' trans women are actual, literal women with penises, you're a bigot for disagreeing and we don't care if this disadvantages women and children'.

Many people and respectable organisations think that they are supporting the former. When in fact they are pushing the latter.

There is nothing to be gained by pursuing anyone who realised too late that the narrative has moved on.

There is no way to force someone to change.

Accepting a genuine apology is probably beneficial on the whole, though.

Just recently TT issued an apology for their stickers. They will, no doubt, be constantly raked over the coals by the TRA lobby for showing weakness....

They think there will be no consequences. They don't care about women. They believe women should STFU and if they don't, nobody will listen anyway.

WTAF is going on in this thread? You're discussing it as if it's a foregone conclusion that logic and common sense will win, and we should prepare for that time now.

Reality is this

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3364329-Motion-against-Liverpool-ReSisters-by-Liverpool-City-Council

not making room for an imaginary admission that they got it wrong.

They will, no doubt, be constantly raked over the coals by the TRA lobby for showing weakness....

Yes they have been. Unfortunately a direct apology for one thing can be taken as a general admission of guilt. Look at the TRAs - they never apologise, even when caught up in something fairly serious.

One reason we have lost the argument so far is our tendency to be reasonable and compromise and try to manage the emotions of our opponents.

It is clear as daylight that this approach simply doesn't work against people who will lie, gaslight, bully and threaten in order to win the argument.

I'm not saying we should adopt their tactics, but I don't think it makes sense to further soften ours.

I can easily forgive individuals who have not followed the narrative closely or have bought into the propaganda that this is like just like gay rights.

Not so much politicians, charities and other orgs that are supposed to put safeguarding as a first priority. They have made a choice to accept women and children being collateral damage as a price worth paying for being woke.

try to manage

Exactly. They're not children, they're adults who don't care about women and don't believe they'll ever be shown to have been wrong.

We laydeez must bend over backwards to be nice to them though

I think this is interesting and I think the inability and/or unwillingness to say they are wrong and to apologise is pretty much down to male socialisation. It's something I very much wanted to address when bringing up my sons.

I agree with Ova that the exploitation of people's desire to be "nice" has been very successful, especially when targeted at women and lefty men. But there's a lot of underlying misogyny revealed when men are challenged by women to think a bit more

.... and of course, the narcissism of many TRAs and politicians just can't be compromised with in any 'normal' way

I agree with the OP only in relation to the 'ordinary people', the general population, the people 'on the Clapham omnibus'. We are so angry because we recognise the threat and won't back down. Why would we expect others to back down in the face of what they feel threatens them? Agression does not win hearts.

As far as politicians are concerned, however, I don't agree. A politician's apology is rarely worth diddly-squat, because it is rarely genuine. Politicians are generally either rigid followers of doctrine, or self-serving power-seekers. If, along the way, they help other people, it's rarely out of the goodness of their hearts or a true belief in helping their fellows, but as a route to achieve their objective: doctrine or power. Their apologies generally come only when not to apologise would cost them more than to apologise.

Power responds to power. Strength responds to strength. But what is perceived as power and strength in men, is often perceived as shrill hysteria in women (gender!). Hence the success of the TRAs.

Jelly

Yep

Don't we want our politicians to have that space to say they misjudged the situation, or listened to incorrect guidance?

When it comes to politicians, but not necessarily other people, they need to get the message loud and clear that they are being warned and if harmed is caused (for example to women locked in a prison with rapists having penises), then people will ask them "why did you refuse to engage with our concerns?"

It is just about the only way you can get a politician to sit up and pay attention. I imagine a fair few will read the Daily Mail's piece on Karen White today and think "I don't want to get the blame for that".

Isn't the expression 'peak transed'? which also throws up public transport options around Derbyshire, but nevermind

Twitter is especially peculiar for this - it's full of people trying to have debates/use their opinion to show you are wrong/convince you to change your mind, and yet....it will not allow you to change your mind or rescind an opinion or modify it. Your initial opinion will always stand. I have stopped engaging with it now, because I know there's no room for growth.

I was listening to Alexis Conran (who used to do the Real Hustle) on Remainiacs and he was talking about cons and tricks. He was saying whenever they revealed they'd conned someone the person always said they knew something wasn't right and they hadn't been had at all. He was applying this to Brexit, suggesting people would never admit they'd been had by the Leave campaign but I wonder if it would apply here? People wouldn't want to admit they'd been taken in by the TRAs.

Lonely

AIBU is the same, on here

Apologies may take a couple of generations.

It may be like the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury apologising for the systematic rape of children - but only when backed into a corner and in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Politicians, editors, BBC executives and charity bosses are 'here today, gone tomorrow', in a revolving door: changing jobs and forever on the move. They only think of the short-term (ie less than 2 years).

Possibly, in 2045, Junior Rees Mogg will make a statement in the House apologising for the actions of her father's party and the Conservative government.

Can we wait that long?

I think there is a third way.

And I think it is asking people whether they accept legal liability for the policies they support.

This is neither aggressive nor conciliatory, but it focuses the mind and makes people put their money where their mouth is.

Political policy positions have consequences. One of the issues with our political debate at present is that people advocate for a position but are never questioned about the direct implications if the position has perverse outcomes.

My view is that if you are not prepared to accept liability, then your views on policy are worthless.