In class we discussed invitational rhetoric from the Foss and Griffin reading, which is based on feminist principles of equality. It is about having an open conversation without attempting to change someone’s mind. Simply listening to all points of view allows an environment in which change can occur. We then questioned if invitational rhetoric can be considered real rhetoric at all. Can it be a type of persuasion if the goal is not strictly to persuade someone, but to allow someone to change their mind on their own? I believe that invitational rhetoric is not only real rhetoric, but may in fact be one of the most persuasive and effective forms of rhetoric. Especially when dealing with very stubborn people, if they feel as though they are being heard they may be more likely to comply. If a stubborn person feels as though they are just being talked at and their point of view is not being acknowledged, they will never want to admit that they are wrong or that the other person may be right. This idea was discussed in the reading as devaluing. There is a concern that persuasion may devalue the position of others. Invitational rhetoric eradicates this concern. Therefore, I believe an open, invitational conversation can be the most persuasive form of rhetoric, even though change may take longer.