How do we provide a face-saving way back to reality for the politicians / public figures who are currently transactivism's minions?

[WhereYouLeftIt]

I feel the tide is turning. Mainstream media are running articles on the current craziness and not just repeating verbatim whatever guff they are handed. Corporations and government departments are starting to distance themselves from Stonewall, and there have been some wins in the courts.

Sunlight is being allowed into the room, and the pigeons are coming home to roost.

But - many have publicly painted themselves into the TWAW corner. Very publicly. And if we're ever going to get them out of there, some, particularly the politicians, are going to need a face-saving way to get out of that corner, their political careers depend on it. And whilst I don't give a stuff for their careers, them saving face and stepping away from their current position will take far fewer years than replacing them with new and unbeholden politicians.

I really don't believe that many of them are True Believers Of The Faith (those who are we can probably do nothing about), just people trying to do a pressured job where time constraints have led them to take as fact the opinions presented to them by lobbyists.

So - what will make these people step out of that corner? What would make that look like a possible, even attractive, path? Carrot? Stick? Even shinier cause to espouse?

I am hoping that one or two will be brave enough to simply say "I got it wrong, I was trying to do a pressured job where time constraints led me to take as fact the opinions presented to me by lobbyists."

Think of all the people that would love and praise them!

Then more will come out in support.

I really think this is possible.

There has to be a golden bridge in Sun Tzu terms otherwise people will fight to the death when there's no viable escape route.

A different take on why people need golden bridges from an anti-vaxxer perspective and using what is known about perpetrating cons/fraud:

Goffman observed that all “marks” eventually come to understand that they have been defrauded. But strangely, they almost never complain or report the crime to the authorities. Why? Because, Goffman argues, admitting that you have been conned is so deeply shameful that “marks” experience it as a kind of social death – the painful end of one of the many social roles we all play.
…
Within those groups, we can pinpoint influential members who may be turning their backs on Covid denialism, and encourage them in their journey. We can message them offering support, particularly if our reference groups overlap – whether that means sharing the same home town, or practising the same faith. The more shared social space, the better. We might offer to back them up if they get trolled for expressing misgivings about Covid denialism. Or we could let them know that we would admire them for telling the truth.

Those people may not have a television audience of millions, but they nonetheless have the potential to act as “coolers” for those in their reference groups – both online and off. The higher their status within the groups, the more influence they will have in reconciling their fellow travellers to the reality of the pandemic, perhaps enabling them to rejoin society, or at least preventing them from endangering the rest of us.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/09/convince-anti-vaxxers

I've no idea how the above is possible if SM platforms keep banning some people because this reduces interaction. And, much as I think the ability to block and mute is much needed (especially by women) it does facilitate being in a bubble - which is why those crossover coolers are so necessary.

NB: I'm a relentless pessimist about the power of sunlight as it means nothing to people when they're in the death grip of consistency and will embrace any level of gaslighting or denial to assure their own cognitive self-soothing.

To persue an analogy:

For decades, both parties of government kept a Faustian pact with Murdoch and the other tabloid proprietors that let them go after celebs, soap stars, footballers wives etc, in return for not getting done over at election time. Blair attended Murdoch's rebaptism in the River Jordan, etc.

Then there was the phone-hacking scandal, and in particular the story about Millie Dowler, which turned out to be substantially false in that there was no direct contact, just a message left on voicemail, but that seemed to lead to a rush to dig consciences out of storage and the rapid euthenasia of the News of the Screws.

The problem is it's not just about saving face. Politicians reverse ferret all the time. It's also about the abuse they will get if they speak out for women. I would not be surprised if many politicians, especially female ones are genuinely scared of the.

I think that's the sort of thing I'm meaning @EmbarrassingAdmissions. I've been mulling over the idea for a while, partly sparked by a radio series on Radio4, 'The Age of Denial' (www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000357l). Which I think I have to go back and listen to again, there was a lot of food for thought in it.

I get what you mean about the cognitive dissonance they've imposed on themselves and the sunlight. I suppose I see the sunlight as affecting those around them, and therefore changing the environment they operate in. Fewer cheerleaders, fewer lobbyists, a few facts sneaking in through the cracks. And then - a golden bridge heaves into view (wishful thinking ...).

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

The problem is it's not just about saving face. Politicians reverse ferret all the time. It's also about the abuse they will get if they speak out for women. I would not be surprised if many politicians, especially female ones are genuinely scared of the.

So the benefit of the face-saving route out has to to outweigh that. That's where I'm stuck.

The tide is turning OP. Just not in the direction you want it to. Literally the first response to you conflates transwomen with sex offenders. How would any rational person think that acceptable?

There's the guilt and the blame for the lack of caution, the failure of safeguarding, the rush to affirmation and surgery, and the possible legal action from detransitioners too. Adults who failed to act like adults when faced with children swept up in a social media craze.

@CorrBlimeyGG

The tide is turning OP. Just not in the direction you want it to. Literally the first response to you conflates transwomen with sex offenders. How would any rational person think that acceptable?

What do you think is the likely result if we allow any male person to legally self-ID as a woman? It's obvious that sex offenders will take advantage of this, like the Wi Spa incident.

Literally the first response to you conflates transwomen with sex offenders.

No it didn't. Read it again.

Even if you incorrectly assume no transwoman could ever possibly be a sex offender (despite the stats, and recorded incidents), the policies being advocated would still be a huge risk due to all the non-transwomen sex offenders.

Transwomen are not a significant factor here. There are hardly any of them anyway. We're worried about males in general.

@CorrBlimeyGG

The tide is turning OP. Just not in the direction you want it to. Literally the first response to you conflates transwomen with sex offenders. How would any rational person think that acceptable?

Rational people understand that safeguarding is not to be taken personally.

Rational people know that when we talk about over 90% of sexual and violent crimes being committed by males, that that doesn't mean we're calling your dad, your son, and your favourite uncle Bertie a sex offender.

Rational people know that a person's gender ID, or lack of, does not predict their likelihood of committing a sexual, violent or otherwise "male-pattern" crime. A person's sex does.

But yes, I am in sad agreement that the tide is turning the wrong way. Women no longer have the rights they were granted for safety and to attempt to redress the balance in our patriarchal society. A regression. And look how happy it makes some of the males.

Your question is really important I think, OP.

I've long noticed how hard it is for powerful people to admit they were wrong about something. It's a shame because learning and changing one's mind based upon the evidence found ("educate yourself" - I did! ) is a trait that I admire in friends.

Agree with PP that the first to publicly acknowledge will get a lot of support.

People love a scapegoat to alleviate themselves of blame and in many ways Stonewall's appalling recent behaviour is a bit of a gift in that respect. But most people still think of them for their noble past achievements.

There's a great article here which is a bit relevant - it basically explains how we've ended up in this position. I think it could be read by someone "on the other side" without triggering defensiveness because of the way it's written.

voidifremoved.substack.com/p/the-guardians-ideological-dead-end

Nice derail, CorrBlimeyGG. But my question regards transACTIVISM, not TW. Or TM. Or NB. Just the activism, and those with power who have fallen for empty virtue-signalling without thinking through the consequences.

So, back to the thread. The anti-vax is a good parallel. Climate change denial too (also mentioned on that R4 programme). And people are looking at ways to overcome the disinformation and psychology that feeds them. What can we learn from that and apply here?

I wonder if the NICE review of paediatric transition will provide such an opportunity. Assuming they follow the evidence and resist political pressures. I’d bet they will - there’s already strong momentum in different countries towards more caution, and nobody wants to be on the child-experimenting Wrong Side of History.

And if that happens, massive TRA tantrums are guaranteed. Which would create an opportunity to come out and condemn such behaviour, while supporting science and reason and not sterilising gay kids. And there would be weighty evidence in the form of a report from NICE to point at, as justification for former supporters changing their minds.

Maybe someone influential could start getting an open letter ready...

By the way I am sure the tide is turning, on social media at least. It seems to have already turned on Reddit, which is anonymous. If things are worse on Facebook it’s because people are being performative with their real names attached to it. I think more and more people know what is happening and are sick of it, even if they don’t talk about it, and when that is the case it’s only a matter of time before something or other triggers a “preference cascade”

Excellent question WhereYouLeftIt

Ideally adults would have the emotional literacy to recognise errors and acknowledge them But I suspect too many are too far gone. Even when faced with extreme harm so many organisations / individuals lack the integrity to openly back down
I believe that safeguarding children and the reactions of all the children currently caught up in this toxic mess will in the long run be massively powerful. I've been reading the report from IICSA (Independent Inquiry Child Sexual Abuse) into all the religious groups prioritising their adults and allowing child abuse to continue - and this is after decades of scandals and guidelines.
The parallels to the untouchable sacred caste are massive. The Wi Spa incident demonstrates how reluctant supposedly rational adults are to call out a predator where the sacred caste is involved.
But it's going to be a long haul.

I think that you could be right OP. My MP,who was very vocal about her association with Stonewall and was full on TWAW has been noticeably quiet on the subject since the Kiera Bell case. Before that she was announcing meetings with Mermaids,papers/ focus groups on LGTB whatever it is now,every week. Recently we've had a concentration on issues that her constituents are concerned about instead,which is very out of character. I note that someone has already donated a copy of 'Trans' to her. Maybe she's done some bedtime reading?

How did Kids Company fall so quickly and comprehensively?

I know there were problems, but I also know (from experience) there was genuine good work happening there. What good work is Stonewall currently doing (genuine question, I'm willing to believe there is some?)

It seems to have already turned on Reddit, which is anonymous

Don't know about generally, but certainly looking at r/TumblrInAction it looks a fair bit like r/GenderCritical at the minute... Not a lot in there apart from gender lunacy.

An alternative route to backtracking is to provide a new stepping stone forwards.

My MP,who was very vocal about her association with Stonewall and was full on TWAW has been noticeably quiet on the subject since the Kiera Bell case.

I think that is the way it mostly ends. People go quiet.

And without a chorus of people applauding the remaining people for saying stupid things, and with ever more people paying attention to the stupid things being said, they'll start to go quiet too.

Then suddenly, it just won't be there any more, and no-one will talk about it.

Some will have to clean up the mess, but you won't see it in the mainstream any more.

@Thelnebriati

An alternative route to backtracking is to provide a new stepping stone forwards.

Simple and excellent.