you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I understand your frustration--I mean, I can see time and again what you're talking about, and I would probably feel the same way if I were you. QT is based more on ideas than facts, so how do you really argue anything if anything can be anything? Those conversations sometimes make me want to scream from second-hand exasperation.

I'm not sure what the solution would be. You understandably feel the way you feel, so no one really has the right to tell you what to say or how to say it. Having thick skin, an open mind, and being able to not take things personally seem like what QT or trans people might need to be able to really engage with you--I think what might be most helpful to GC people is having lots of patience (which it seems like you've exhausted a while ago). I wish I had something more helpful or useful to add, I'm sorry.

[–]Spikygrasspod 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not sure that's what we need, to be honest. To take the friend I was talking about, I think what she needs is intellectual honesty and to stop treating women's interests as unimportant. I don't think the breakdown in communication was due to sensitivity, impatience or mistakes, I think it was due to her being emotionally and intellectually manipulative in order to rationalise her worldview and behaviour and make it appear less like what it is: prioritising her personal identity, and her affiliation with other transfeminist philosophers and activists, over women's collective interests and safety. She rejected the idea of third spaces, by the way, which made me think it's not really about safety for her. I think when faced with someone like that, patience is beside the point and women need to advocate for their interests more directly, with e.g. policymakers.