Be Kind 2.0 and the "Persuasive TRA"

[BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth]

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.

I agree.
And don't forget the Fog of Confusion 'But it's all so complicaaaaaated!' 🙄

Yes, let's not let ourselves be surrounded by any kind of fog again. I really don't want to spend the next 15 years trying to undo the Next Thing That Men Want.

'Be kind'

That ship has well and truly sailed. Appeasement should be off the table.

Are we supposed to forget the misogyny, harassment, the 'no debate' pillocks. The threats of violence, death threats, rape threats etc?

They've unequivocally shown us who they are. It should never be forgotten.

It reminds me of every International Women's day when the usual posts turn up from men complaining there isn't a Man's day, there is, but they don't know that because no woman's reminded them

Almost spit out my coffee! 😂

Another poster on another thread said something that I had to post here, before I forget: piggybacking. Watch out for the piggybacking of Be Kind 2.0 and various pleadings onto other issues that women care about.

Just another form of gaslighting, but if activists can tack it onto something else, in order to persuade women, they will.

Seems to me that there is definitely an increased attempt to leverage the gnc women argument again. Quite a bit of 'the Guidance is bad for trans people, but it is also bad for women too <sad face>'.

Example on reddit last week:
For example, there are quite a few women who feel intimidated with the current atmosphere around sex policing. They may choose to avoid facilities and no longer be patrons of an establishment if there were strict enforcement of single-sex spaces. So would allowing trans women access to the women's single-sex spaces be objectively justified, in that it creates a less hostile atmosphere for some service users?

I've seen a lot of this as well. I'm hoping that this might dissipate with time, especially as women get used to having their own toilets back (just an example, as perhaps the most visible reminder of this issue) and men and "allies" get used to using mixed-sex spaces. Perhaps I am being optimistic. Another thing to look out for.

And appropriation! (from another thread)
I feel like I'm writing some kind of Handbook on How Not To Get Caught Out Again.

Yes, well, the Supreme Court judgment was very good for transmen, they kept their pregnancy and maternity rights.

The short answer to So would allowing trans women access to the women's single-sex spaces be objectively justified, in that it creates a less hostile atmosphere for some service users? is "no".

Legally it's not a single-sex space it's a mixed-sex space. So you could offer a fully mixed-sex service because you didn't need a single-sex service in the first place; or else you could offer a women-only service plus a unisex service (like a row of women's bogs plus a unviersal bog; or else you could offer a women-only service plus some special service for biological women who can't access other women's services (like a rape crisis meeting for women with broken voices and beards due to testosterone use). That last one is a service for bio women with a trans identity. And that's allowed.

I also feel that there have been some attempts at bartering along the lines of 'give us the toilets and we'll give you the sports and RCCs'. I expect that for both HSTS and fetishists the toilets (and changing rooms?) is what they will miss most. I have wondered if that is what the 'sex is special category personal data' in the Guidance is trying to achieve; a situation where TIMs can access the toilets if they don't make a big show of it, in exchange for giving up on the rest of the demands for women's resources. It puts the onus back on women to tackle the men and the service providers and the employers, giving more opportunity for men to say 'well we tried to fix it, can we not all work together on this' wheedling that was outlined in the OP

Yes, the bargaining and bartering. That's another tactic. Isn't bargaining one of the Stages of Grief?

I'm fairly certain that 'sex is special category personal data' thing has been debunked and challenged by Sex Matters, so hopefully it will be removed before the guidance is approved. It's an erroneous statement, apparently added in by Bridget's minions, probably thinking they could sneak it past all of us!

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.

Well, that about sums it up, doesn't it? There is definitely a pattern here. I'm going to keep a close eye on Stonewall. When they jump, we'll be ready!

Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.

Feels like the last one is a way off😐

"Mental health impact on trans people" - as stated in Parliament debate this afternoon. That'll tug on some heartstrings, so we'll watch out for that.

Thanks for that!
Yes, long way off, and, for some, I suspect never.

I’m going to have the same attitude as they collectively display towards detransitioners. No one forced them to modify their bodies medically. They need to take responsibility for their own actions and the consequences that come with those freely taken actions.

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.

Good post and good points OP.

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,

No. Not women's problems. They have had no fucks to give about women being excluded, harmed, assaulted, harassed, and have behaved appallingly towards women.... #notyourmum

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?)

Shrug. #notyourmum

Kindness and reciprocity at this point has to come from this political movement and start with the capacity to respect women, to see them as equally human and from a point of belief and protection of women's single sex spaces, women's need for them, women's rights to them, and the respecting of women's language and identity.

Enough of that demonstrated and I might once more get interested in what these men feel, want and need. But at this point, #compassionfatigueandburnedout. And #notyourmum. And stuff anyone wittering about 'being the bigger doormat person. They have a LOT of repairing to do with women first.

Modelling of healthy boundaries, expectation of actual equality in standards, and clear identification of the behaviours needed. The message does spread (to the general public, not to activists); it got us this far.

Definitely a no from me. Your analogy is spot on.

Ophelia, I agree. Especially #notyourmum. They will have to learn to cope and fix their own problems (of their own making, I might add). And, for those men who just will not hear the word no, there is the law, and we will be watching them.

There are too many women now who have been through the wringer, and some of us who have had family members caught up in this will never get back what we had. We cannot let this happen again. We will not.

I’ve also been pointing out the mirroring/gaslighting/argument reversals here and elsewhere for about a decade. It isn’t a new thing.

I think it goes with the types of personality disorders that are overrepresented in transgenderism.

Has anyone listened to the podcast "Agree to disagree about gender"? Presented by a trans woman and a gender critical lesbian I think. I haven't had the time yet but I'm curious to see where the discussions land.