Letters - 07 March 2025

Trans welcome

Quakers, at our best, observe a longstanding tradition of speaking up about, and standing up to, injustice. So I am troubled by an increasing trend, wherein some Quakers invoke our practices of stillness and silence in worship when Friends decide to speak up about transphobia in Quaker communities. Friends are cautioned to temper their language at the mention of the word ‘transphobia’, lest they raise the emotional tone of the situation and risk offending ‘concerned’ others.

This dismissive and patronising practice drowns out the voices of trans Friends who are expressing real hurt at feeling marginalised and unsafe in our community. The insinuation is that we should remain silent, while older and ‘wiser’ Friends happily challenge their right to safely exist, drawing on false dichotomies between the rights of trans people and women/children/and other groups. 

Silence in our Meetings is a tool that allows us to better discern the voice of God, and should not be used to ensure that only some people can speak. Friends, I hope we continue to speak up, loudly and clearly, in support of our trans community. In the tradition of plain speaking, I hope we call out transphobia when we see it. Our communities will be safer, more diverse, and vibrant when we do.

Craig Wilson

I was saddened to read in ‘Thought for the Week’ (21 February) the suggestion that Quakers should entertain differences of opinion on trans-related ‘controversies.’ 

In my experience this ‘debate’ always boils down to, at best, a belief that trans people are not really who they say they are. At worst, it portrays trans women as an inherent threat to the safety of cis women and girls, and trans men as vulnerable, self-hating women. 

In such a climate, a tolerance of ‘debate’ undermines the 2021 Yearly Meeting’s affirmation of trans Friends (Minute 31). 

Either we welcome and support trans people, which includes at a minimum believing they are who they say they are, or we don’t. ‘Dialogue’ and ‘balance’ are not always virtues. Feminist author Sara Ahmed writes, ‘When you have “dialogue or debate” with those who wish to eliminate you from the conversation (because they do not recognize what is necessary for your survival, or because they don’t even think your existence is possible), then “dialogue and debate” becomes a technique of elimination.’ Friends who continue to tolerate this ‘debate’ set themselves against the wellbeing of trans people and against the leadings of the Holy Spirit as discerned by the Yearly Meeting. Compromise cannot be made with the spirit of fear that drives the anti-trans moral panic.

Mark Russ

Taking direction

I trained as a spiritual director/accompanier about fifteen years ago, after completing an Equipping for Ministry course. I work for the local diocese. Sheila Taylor (21 February) is right in hoping that we as a Religious Society of Friends lovingly accompany each other, and we do.

Sometimes, however, l have found a hesitancy about doing that among Friends. Following two terrible bereavements l asked an experienced Friend to pray with me. He demurred saying he no longer prayed. I was grateful that the local vicar would pray with me and that l could kneel in prayer at a local cathedral. Accompaniment is something that some Friends may find helpful. It is a gift when the Spirit is sighing on our behalf.

Janet Perry

Sheila Taylor is right that Friends can offer spiritual accompaniment to one another; spiritual friendship groups have a long history. I am part of a group that grew out of a Woodbrooke course some years ago, and our meetings have enriched my life. Our group brings together a variety of viewpoints and backgrounds; listening lovingly and truthfully to one another has helped all of us to grow.

But I find some of Sheila’s comments puzzling. In no tradition is spiritual accompaniment offered as an alternative to counselling. Their objectives are quite different, and this is fundamental to the way the accompanier and the counsellor will approach conversations. Nor is accompaniment ‘a solely inwardly-directed process, lacking in contact with the outside world’. Nothing could be further from the truth. To those involved in accompaniment, the closing question always is, ‘What does what I have discovered here, about God and myself, mean for how I live everywhere else?’

These can be deep waters, where members of a spiritual friendship group may not feel ready to go. Nor may it be appropriate. In-depth individual accompaniment requires training and supervision, safeguarding and a code of ethical conduct. It would be irresponsible to suppose otherwise.

Those wishing to share conversation about their spiritual life and their relationship with the sacred have always had choices. There is richness to be discovered however one wishes to engage, and I heartily encourage Friends to explore.

Hilary Curwel

Managerialism

Thank you, Beth Allen (31 January), for raising the issue of ‘managerialism’ and the recognition of the valuable tools which are on offer for us to use.

My recent experience as a trustee for a Quaker-led charity highlighted for me my ignorance of the basic management approaches used in the business/commercial world, where important decisions are required of the trustee body/board of directors. (I had no previous trustee experience.) 

My first board meeting was an ‘away day’, to consider defining an interim governance structure, to improve communications and decision-making alongside the essential trustee main duties, to develop an approach to reinforce Quaker identity, and setting out the vision, mission, aims and strategic objectives. The CEO of the charity concerned was equipped to lead and guide the trustees with these topics on that away day, and continued to engage /educate us in our roles as trustees – but without him I would not have known where to start!

The roles we hold as Quakers are ones that demand much of us. And in cases where the role is with an outside body/charity,  they will have regulatory and legal requirements which must be complied with. So it is important that we ‘skill-up’, and avoid wasting time and resources. 

I would like to recommend two publications: The Q-Bit, produced by Quaker Social Action; and Good Business: Ethics at work, by the Quakers and Business Group.

Heather Kent

Crimmigration

It was helpful to read Catherine Henderson’s article (21 February) about the parallel perspectives on immigration and asylum in Britain and the USA. Negative views of the stranger can easily be stirred up on the basis of false labels. The deliberate use of the term ‘criminal’ alongside words used to describe immigrants paints a picture of anti-social thieves and murderers, rather than an often truer picture of people fleeing violence and persecution. 

A recent book, Mental Health, Crime and the Impact of Criminal Justice on the Vulnerable, uses the term ‘crimmigration’, explaining how that is used to justify the UK’s use of indefinite detention. The experience of these detention centres damages the mental health of vulnerable people, while a long-winded and slow process is used to determine what the future holds.

Meanwhile, anyone using health or care services in the UK is likely to be cared for by people who are either first- or second-generation immigrants. Any Bible-reading Quakers may recall the story of the good Samaritan, who responded to the needs of a complete stranger when others had passed by.

Martin Schweiger

I share Catherine Henderson’s disappointment that our government wishes to make it more difficult to migrate here. But we need to acknowledge that many people in the UK feel that their way of life is threatened by immigration. We should respond to this by suggesting that the best way to deal with this would be for the government to do what it can to address the root causes of migration: poverty, climate change and armed conflict. Cooperating with other nations in tackling these would be a better use of our resources than building barriers and increasing defence spending.  

Trevor Evans